Tell us what you think of the new afaqs! design
Ian's being crafted from a first-
thought into something good.
When agencyfaqs! spoke to some of India’s biggest advertisers early this week, they found it hard to conceal their unhappiness with creative awards. ‘This really has nothing to do with advertising that sells’, was the sum of their response.
It wasn’t always like this. Marketers used to be proud when the campaigns that they had approved were awarded. They felt good just as feature film makers do when a well made, intelligent film does well at the box office.
If things have changed, the advertising business has brought it upon itself. Far too often, an ad entry’s claim to fame is based on an untruth: that it has been seen or heard by the brand’s target consumers.
 |
Sreekant Khandekar |
That’s when the full horror of scam advertising hit me. These are charged times, so let me clarify that this hasn’t anything to do with either the Abbys or Goafest per se. It could be either – or any other award.
How do clients matter, you mutter under your breath? They matter because their brands are the fig leaf necessary to create even scams.
Next, some clever young thing will undoubtedly think up a scam brand for which to make scam ads, thus doing away with the need for a client at all. And of course, we will be assured that such a client does exist. Just that he belongs to some small town which none of us has visited.
Client disdain upsets me because it doesn’t take long for contempt for creative awards to translate into contempt for ad agencies and worse – contempt for the process of advertising itself.
It upsets me because every time a scam ad wins, it cheats a better deserving entry which actually appeared in mass media and tried to connect with consumers. For every undeserving winner, there is a deserving loser.
It upsets me because every time a scam ad is entered, it cheats the client of involvement with the creative process. The agency deprives the client of the simple pleasure of saying, ‘Let’s go with it’, to a great piece of work.
It wasn’t always so bad. I have been watching and attending advertising awards since 1989 when I co-founded A&M magazine. (For those who came in late, it was India’s biggest advertising and marketing magazine ever.)
I have sought out parallels to see if there is any other profession or business which will explain the existence of scam ads.
What are scam ads? In the simplest terms, a scam ad is work that an agency wishes it had client approval for to run in mass media – and which makes a token appearance (generally once) in some minor or niche media.
Look at the fashion business. Fashion shows consist of impossible looking models wearing impossible looking clothes that no one outside the room will ever see. Isn’t that a scam too?
No it isn’t, and here’s why. Internationally, haute couture forms a microscopic fraction of the apparel business, where pret a porter (ready to wear) dominates. And yet, haute couture was once famously described as the poodle that pulls the apparel train. Why?
Because a much toned down version or aspect of what we see in fashion shows frequently finds its way into everyday clothing. (In India, though, fashion shows are either for the very rich or simply media events.)
In any case, nobody pretends that what we see in fashion shows is what ordinary people buy. Unlike scam ads, which pretend to have appeared in mass media. And that’s why fashion shows are honest and scam ads are not.
Or take automobile shows, where car manufacturers display concept cars. Again, nobody is pretending that these cars are being bought by customers. They are merely a car maker’s statement of vision and intent – where manufacturing and design are headed and what tomorrow’s automobile may look like. The auto awards that we read about, on the other hand, are for cars that thousands of people buy every year.
Or look at the business closest to our own, the feature film business. You can see how producers, directors, financiers, exhibitors and a legion of talented professionals have, together, pushed the boundaries of Hindi film making.
Today, the films that win the popular awards are the ones that lakhs of people actually see. Art films and documentaries have their place, too. But there’s a different set of awards for those, and their distribution circuit is separate as well. Nobody pretends that they are popular, and that’s fine.
Let’s not kid ourselves. None of these professions or businesses is less creative than advertising. And while they may be full of pretension at other levels, none of them tries to pass off experimental work as mainstream.
And that’s exactly what the game has become when it comes to Indian advertising awards: Far too often, it’s sleight of hand. See if you can pass off this fake as the real thing, will you?
So, isn’t there a place for experimentation? Or pushing the boundaries? Of course, there is.
At agencyfaqs!, we feel so strongly about it that we will soon allow people to upload their work, irrespective of whether or not it has been published, on the site. And let other professionals enjoy it and learn from it. There’s no indignity that I can see in admitting that work is experimental.
Last year at Goa, Trevor Beattie (best known for FCUK) passionately tried to stir the audience against scam ads, “Imagine going up on a stage and collecting an award at a music or movie awards function when it hasn’t even been aired. Scam ads are just the same.”
Privately, senior agency executives wring their hands and say that every entry is accompanied by a client approval. What else can they possibly do? Besides, everybody else is doing the same thing.
Well, to my mind, leadership is about doing the right thing. If an ad has not been genuinely created for a client and run in mass media, it ought not to be entered. Or else, why don’t agencies just get together and agree that published as well as unpublished work can be entered for awards?
Yes, I do understand the compulsions of business, but most professions function inside a business. Advertising is not alone.
An engineer practises in the context of a property developer’s need. A doctor inside a corporate hospital. An editor within a publishing house. They all operate under business pressure. And the good ones do their stuff honestly and well.
If agency big shots don’t stand up for what they think is right, they will be guilty of more than just encouraging scam advertising.
They will be telling a whole generation of young advertising people that it is okay to bend the rules to get ahead.
Worse, they will be implying that clients never buy good advertising. And that is an untruth.
Sreekant Khandekar is editor-in-chief and director of agencyfaqs!
© 2010 afaqs!From Horatio, Mon 21 Sep 2009 11:57:00 PM The problem with scam is that it isn't a parasite that has burrowed into the system...it IS the system and it is aggressively promoted by the top creatives at the head of a few 'creative' agencies....just look at a few pics from Cannes and you'll know who the culprits are. The only people who can turn off the scam tap are clients.....they should not approve any entries that were not created for them on a real brief...that's that.
From Anoop RP, Fri 17 Apr 2009 02:37:52 PM Sir,
Every single word that you’ve written is true.
The whole article makes absolute sense.
With people like you on the top afaqs truly deserves to be the world’s No.1.
From nikky, Mon 06 Apr 2009 01:21:19 PM hi,
I am a part of advertising agency and working in one of the top agency. I am very amazed and furustrated too with the kind of effort and money put to make a scam ad into a legal ad.I thnk the awards organisers have to accept only broadcasted ads and try maximum to avoid accepting scam ad entries like a print ad has to be published minimum in five pubulicaton to be eligible to enter the awards as to enter a scam ad to awards the agency gets the idea printed once somehow in any magazine through their media agency. If any idea is actually published less than five times with client acceptance, the agency should get approval or sign on the entry to prove it.If you ask me at the end of the day only 3 out of ten awards is won by published ads.most of the awards winning entries are scam which even the judges know about it. Cant we have a strict instructions and restrictions on these awards to make it little respectable. To be frank the creative guys are more keen on awards for their profile which is not wrong but they have to realise that clients satisfaction is more important who is spending huge money and is also responsible for their salary.
From Ramesh Chandran, Fri 03 Apr 2009 12:52:58 PM This probably would one of the few articles which has got 37 comments and mine being the 38th. The article is very well articulated and hopefully the bigwigs in the industry take note. I have been a Media man all my life and every year around December i would have the creative guys coming into Media Department(for the other 11 months we are ignored) and being overtly friendly. I am also ashamed to say that , i helped release a couple of these and thanfully they did not win any awards);-. However in my tenure at one of the big agencies, the Head of the agency was with me when i refused to help the creatives. And the agency is today known for strong strategy and solid communication work.
I am a abby winner for Innovation in Outdoor Media and i could see that they guys were not really happy to see a media guy win an award.
Its time that the agency stops dealing with the so called "Hotshots" with Kid Glove and make them accountable as other departments in the agency.
Somebody had mentioned about displaying the shortlisted entries on Afaqs-Great Idea.
Cheers
From Sumit Roy, Wed 16 Apr 2008 06:45:25 AM Circa 1999, when Pradeep Guha was President of Ad Club Bombay, he introduced a category for the Abbies called "Unpublished Work".
The "creatives" rebelled. They somehow sensed that their desire to pass of art as advertising had been exposed. To Ad Club's discredit, the category was dropped the next year.
But to Ad Club's credit, they brought in the EFFIES. That's advertising you can't scam.
Pretty soon most clients will start seeing all of the Abbies as "unpublished work". If they don't do so already.
By the way, Jack, loved the term "effectives". There are some people in the advertising industry who do believe that that's their job.
From Jack Kerouak, Sun 13 Apr 2008 10:15:29 PM Bravo Sreekant – it needed saying and you did. But the phenomenon of scam ads is like pimples – they are the ugly little spots one sees, whereas the actual problem is the impurities in the blood. Here are some of the problems in the blood.
1. There is a fallacy built into the very structure of ad agencies, when a certain bunch of people are anointed as “Creative” (as if they belong to a different species). It persuades them to believe that they fell off Shakespeare’s writing desk or Leonardo’s palette, on to Earth – and that their mission in life itself, is to be ‘creative’ i.e. do things that are “different” or “risky”. I wonder if they’d do different work if they were called “Effectives’?
2. Naturally, they are upset when they feel the Clients don’t want “breakthrough” work. Who will give them great salaries unless they can show enough ‘breakthrough’ work? Unfortunately, the Clients aren’t in the business of supporting “breakthrough creative” work. They are in the business of making profits.
3. To make matters worse, many of these “instant creatives” lack a thorough knowledge of the market or consumers or even past great advertising – in most cases, their knowledge is limited to familiarity with Cannes winners.
4. They would do well to remember that they are working in a commercial organization – just like the Clients. (Remember, WPP also watches quarterly results just as much as your Client.) Clients pay the agency for doing work that supports the marketing program - of which the advertising is only a small part – even if the creatives believe that advertising makes the world go round.
5. And finally, the moral outrage of creatives at being “forced” by Clients to do ‘non-creative’ work is pathetic. All you have to do is persuade your bosses to sack such Clients. In any case, nobody is forcing you to prostitute your creative talent – walk out. But that takes real b*****. Which are not required for doing scam ads.
From Mangesh Borse, Sun 13 Apr 2008 08:24:12 AM Super Sreekant. Well written article.
No amount of explainations will convince the agency and creative heads(The functions are not separable anymore) about the difference between ability to ideate and ability to execute. You cannot be awarded for getting ideas. You can if a great idea is converted into a business idea, because that is the function of advertising. I hope this is not a lost case and partly, we can see it from the fact that so many account management executives prefer to move out of this beautiful business and set out into newer territories.
It will be a good business idea to start selling trophies created by various artists. Am pretty sure there are many takers here.They look good on the their CV and their shelves(the more the merrier) and they have a direct bearing on their take home.
One of the fallouts of this phenomena is that we have not been able to create any new icons from the creative world (for the general public) after the few big names in creative today. I guess you cannot count more than four or five of them.
Hope this trend will change and the real gems of advertising shine out.
Mangesh
From shubho sengupta, Sat 12 Apr 2008 10:59:44 PM this has been one of the best discussions on scams.
From soby sebastian,director marketing,metrovaartha,cochin, Sat 12 Apr 2008 12:14:09 PM The unfortunate reality in conferring such awards is that the end user gets no chance to express his view ever.The appeal of any ad would be better judged if its effectiveness is judged through an open poll.While technicalities may be primarily judged by the jury, the final verdict should always be left to the ads' appeal in the market place.Otherwise scam or no-scam, it wouldn't really make any sense in conferring such awards!
From S T rao, Fri 11 Apr 2008 07:45:22 PM I have only one query. What about the jury? Why is no one talking about their role? Are they naive or so clinically objective that they just go by the rule book and do not understand the repercussion of their decisions? please enlighten.
From shubho sengupta, Fri 11 Apr 2008 05:30:55 PM At this point, a question to Sreekanth Khandekar:
Will you refuse to carry articles glorifying scam awardees? For example, will you refuse to carry article, 'Y FROM AGENCY Y WINS CLIO FOR Z BARBER SHOP'? Alternatively, will you add a footnote along these lines: Note: The TVC in question was aired at 11.59pm on Aastha Channel, on 31.12.2008.
That would be a great beginning, sir.
From ARVIND DESAI, Fri 11 Apr 2008 04:23:53 PM SHUBHO: why don't people attack bad advertising with the same passion as they attack scams? for the same reason that we get agitated about murder but dismiss death in a traffic accident. the difference is intent.
the creator of a scam ad is deliberately cheating but the creator of bad advertising is mrely inept.
From shubho sengupta, Fri 11 Apr 2008 09:22:44 AM 1. in the long run, scams don't work for anyone - the creator, the agency, the brand. consistently good work does. and consistently good work also gets rewarded at the awardplace and marketplace. (hutch, perfetti).
2. why don't people attack bad advertising with the same passion they attack scams?
i guess because bad advertising still works. as long as the thing has a logo somewhere, the typical marketing manager doesn't care.
From kapil dhawan, Fri 11 Apr 2008 10:07:14 AM well, the reason why we can't is because a whole lot of us belong to a different generation. the one of instant gratification. these guys have persevered to reach where they have.
From Nanda Kishore Sethuraman, Fri 11 Apr 2008 10:02:40 AM Mr. Khandekar - Thanks for your honest views. I couldn't agree more, especially since I am on the clients' side of the table now. It would be great if the advertising industry (which I still belive I am a part of) showcases higher levels of honesty. I am not against scam ads, but let us say that these are experiments.
I am led to believe that this is an issue dogging not just the Indian Advertising Industry, but the world over.
If all that the industry needs is a networking arena to drink, make merry, smoke up and be happy, I don’t seem to understand why they should hide behind a skirt called ‘ad awards’?
I would not be surprised if we found that almost all the awards doled out during the Goa fest were scams released in some obscure newspaper in Assam or some channel watched (!!?!?!!) by people living in a tribal location serving no purpose. Let us be clear, that the ad awards functions conducted by spending a lot of money is to showcase campaigns that may or may not have seen the light of day and segregate them. Let us see how many agencies come up with great selling campaigns and how many of them are working towards giving a vent to their creativity. I am sure the industry will be much appreciated for such a move and the clients would really appreciate such honesty.
I heard in one of the interviews where Mr. Madhukar Kamat said that he would like to change the pitching process in this country. With all due respects sir, the clients would be very happy to do so. But would it be possible for the agencies also to showcase ONLY those campaigns which have been great in terms of its selling capabilities and not just high on the creative quotient (or should I call it the SPAM quotient?)
Having been on the clients’ side for a while now, I find that quite a few agencies (including the big ones) lack selling quotient in their campaigns and it reflects starting from the pitch process. Agencies should function as partners (in crime or glory) and to always state that the client does not have the (pardon me) ‘balls’ to release an award winning campaign is a pathetic excuse. As a client, my job is to identify selling communication work and not feed the frenzy of the advertising fraternity to satisfy their creative needs.
Hope floats… still !!!! Stop blaming the client for all that does not happen and start working together. I am sure the advertising industry could do much better without these awards which to my mind is just a farce.
And for all those creative folks who have commented here. With due respects to all your capabilities - I very strongly believe that the advertising industry lacks what is called QC! Quality Check - for the non-initiated. Just go through all the comments here and figure out the number of spelling errors. I am sure the same is true for all those 'released' ads in major publications spending a lot of money. For God's sake - put your house in order and we clients would be very happy to decorate it beautifully!
From prasad p, Thu 10 Apr 2008 04:20:27 PM Dear Mr.Khandekar ,
after reading your comments and feedback on the award winning SCAM ADs , it would intresting to watch all those ads on agencyfaqs.com why dont you showcase it on agencyfaqs,? and LET THE TRUTH PREVALI!!!
From Poochy T, Thu 10 Apr 2008 12:14:02 PM Wah Kapil, well said. that comment on 'the greatest fight the real wars' sums it up dramatically and perfectly. if the piyushs, the balkis and the prasoons can convince clients, why can't the rest of us.
From kapil dhawan, Thu 10 Apr 2008 11:42:44 AM bang on! every word is true. as far as clients not buying great work etc. well, that's a reality. but if you work at it, they give way. and that's what a turnaround team/brand is all about. perseverance is the key to greatness.
what we see today is a shortcut approach. both on part of creative people, creative directors and agency heads. the greatest fight the real wars. piyush, prasoon, sonal, ryan, alok are some examples of that breed.
From Achal Paul, Thu 10 Apr 2008 11:08:46 AM Hey Sreekant,
Congrats on exposing the scam. I am glad I did not miss it. May I suggest to keep writing off and on as it will work as an eye openers for freshers and even veterans, if they want to give it a serious look.
Cheers,
Achal Paul
From Sabyasachi Kundu, Wed 09 Apr 2008 08:20:13 PM Sreekant. Great. After a long time read your article. Clear and to the point.
No argument here.
Regards
Kundu
From lbhat, Wed 09 Apr 2008 07:32:45 PM I think the ad industry is paying lip service to addressing the issue of scam ads and hence they corner glory at Awards. If our business is about adding value to the client's business through ideas, those ideas have to work within the constraints of business. Scam ads are about unfettered freedom. The glory that one gets at Awards is the wrong carrot to waive at youngsters. They come into the business thinking that an Ambient idea or an anti-smoking ad is the path to success. And that is teaching them the wrong values.
As an aside, while clients may scoff at awards, they secretly look to being in the limelight through award winning work. They also contribute to scam indirectly by settling for 'safe' work most of the time. This leads to frustration among the younger lot who then take solace in scam ads to build their portfolio. But the onus on discouraging scam work squarely lies with the leadership in agencies.
From disgusted, Wed 09 Apr 2008 07:31:24 PM Sheila, you are just the kind of person who brings advertising a bad name. To quote you "I see myself sitting in front of clients who are dumb and know nothing about branding."
Are you serious?! Wwhere are you from? Harvard? Heaven? Both?
From Eshan, Wed 09 Apr 2008 05:11:00 PM ajay, good to know you share a similar viewpoint and yes sellling a great idea to the client is part of the adman's business. But I would go a bit further and say that today apart from the few examples that we have quoted - there is a dearth of undertsanding and apprecition of a good idea from many a client's end. I hesitate to say majority as then there will be unnecessary debate about blaming clients. The issue is that the Awards are being made as the be all and end all . Sure - pathbreaking and original thinking in any feild should be appreciated and awards should be aspired and worked towards but not be something that have to be had all costs- even scam work. Guess this blind run towards we are better or no1 or no 2 or no 3 because we have won more awards- whichever way pssoible- is what needs to be addressed.
From Ajay Shroff, Wed 09 Apr 2008 03:54:22 PM Very well articulated. I totally agree with you, another criteria to evaluate creativity would also be the response or sales that it has generated for the client and not released work in some inconsequential vernacular media.
From Amit Sud, Wed 09 Apr 2008 03:10:45 PM Eshan, i totally agree with you. There are a lot of great campaigns so only losers say that clients dont buy good advertising. What about Happydent? Idea? Greenply? Hutch/Vodafone? Nike? Airtel? Fevicol?
Being able to get a great idea across convincingly to clients is part of the advertising business.
From sheila, Wed 09 Apr 2008 02:41:53 PM you article is well written. As for the content, I have my views. I am a crative myself. And believe it or not I see myself sitting in front of clients who are dumb and know nothing about branding. Also I do not agree that Indian audience is now mature enough for advertising. Most researches I have been assigned to have shown that the consumer still wants the old formula and sometimes openly questions the need for doing fresh work. And researches... well to put it in perspective ABSOLUT wouldn't have been there if the research outcome was followed. As for awards... we want our creative space and we our proving it. It's not that we aren't doing good work for them. It's just that we are doing such creative work to compete against other creatives and the non beievers should stay out of this. PERIOD.
From Eshan, Wed 09 Apr 2008 02:17:22 PM Apt piece given the current scenario. What's required is genuine good work at awards. A happydent that swept the very same goa fest last year a daag acche hain and other such mainstream campaigns that the consumers have seen and loved. we need agencies like mccann and lowe to to participate.This is the kind of work that deserves accolades. Its not about awards but what is being awarded. And yes behind a happydent or surf or a honda grrr or a Nike apart from the agency there are clients who have the ability and the gumption to spot and promote great brand builiding ideas.
From Maia Katrak, Wed 09 Apr 2008 01:27:24 PM I was so heartened by your article.
There are pockets of sanity in this business, after all!
My father, Kersy Katrak, used to say that the only thing we need focus on is ideas and craft. All else, money, awards etc., will follow.
I still believe he was right. In spite of everything I see going on around me, I believe we will come around to this way of thinking again.
Thank you for the article!
From satya, Wed 09 Apr 2008 12:39:25 PM I fully agree. It is time agencies put a stop to scam ads. Scams ads do one big damage to the overall advertising process; these scam ads take the creatives far away from the ground realities of business. And make them exist in a cocoon far away from the brand and consumers. It is possibly the worst kind of self indulgence and our business can not afford it anymore
From Rohit Sharma, Wed 09 Apr 2008 12:26:24 PM "Client disdain upsets me because it doesn’t take ............ contempt for the process of advertising itself."
Well Shreekant ur worst fears have already come true!! I shifted to client side some time back and I can confirm that Ad Guys, Ad Agencies and Ad Process itself is looked down upon by nearly everybody in Marketing.
Comment from biggies like Balki - "You don't need to be well educated A grader to make it big in advertising"- is not helping the matter for ad agencies.
Recent comment by Sandeep Tarkas, president Future Group-"most ad guys don't know most of the times what they are talking about"- illustrate my point further.
One of the major reasons for me shifting from ad agency to client side was that the profession has lost its respect. Ad agencies and ad guys are seen as unavoidable evil with sharp tongue but low IQ.
Sad but true.
From Andy, Wed 09 Apr 2008 11:05:44 AM this new agencyfaqs initiative seems like a good idea. When is starting? Will it cover all media, including radio?
From Disgruntled Italian Chef, Wed 09 Apr 2008 11:01:44 AM Raman, well said.
From Disgruntled Italian Chef, Wed 09 Apr 2008 10:56:52 AM Sreekant, I am not for scam either, but seriously A&M days are about as relevant to advertising today as President Bush is to America.
Client's today are dumb. Painfully dumb. They play safer than a man who has 15 unwanted children, have little imagination and love research more than most scientists I know.
Cretivity feels trapped. Creative existence starts coming under question. "3 saal ho gaye, na abhi tak koi script approve hui hai na koi great ad nikla" is a refrain you will hear often. Your comparisisons aren't valid. No one stops Bono from recording a great song. Or evena lesser artist. No one says hey dude, nice song, but could you please ad some african beats and take away the tune completely?"
It's the marriage between art and business, which worked beutifully one time cos the business men were gifted artists themselves, that's failing us today.
Creatives were brought in to create the best advertisng they could create which did the brand justice. How do you explain then, that once even the agency head has bought into it, the client adds a dozen inanities and removes the essence, saying 'nice hai' but i am from pre-volkwvagon advertising era'. It's often this relevant and rejected work that gets branded as scam.
Scams not the way, but I can empathize. My beautiful creative friends are just italian chefs who are asked to serve chaat day in and day out.
From horbhaikihaalhai, Wed 09 Apr 2008 10:22:57 AM Hmmm.. all quiet on the western front?
From subhash kamath, Wed 09 Apr 2008 10:11:12 AM Brilliantly written, Shreekant!! You've articulated all that I feel about this whole sordid business of scams. Hope to see more such pieces in the future! Cheers!
From Meples, Wed 09 Apr 2008 10:08:18 AM Something worth reading after a long time on agencyfaqs!
From Rohit Anand, Wed 09 Apr 2008 10:05:22 AM Good to see a thought through view on the whole business of awards. I hope this is not hijacked to a discussion on whether we shd have awards or not, which is invariably what happens , to detract from just one pernicious practice in advertising award shows.
Just one issue with the fashion shows analogy... A lot of the designers donot even pretend to be for any market, being happy to design and make dresses for a select few 'friends'. Worse, you actually have some designers who just like to be called that, with no backend to speak of, when it comes to actually producing their creations...They are a little worse than the concept cars of auto shows, in that sense.
From achint, Wed 09 Apr 2008 09:31:02 AM ...great. suggest u get comments from some indsutry veterans as well. also check out what weightage CLIENTS give to an award winner duringa pitch. and, can someone tell us what happened to the rbands that have been award winners in the yesteryears?
From Shivaraman, Wed 09 Apr 2008 09:21:37 AM Well said, Sreekant. I couldn;t agree more on this issue, and hope the industry will also benefit from your experienced views on this.
From raman, Wed 09 Apr 2008 08:57:29 AM I agree with the fact that the clients should not encourage scam ads and the agencies should not enter such ads for awards. And only genuine work should get acknowledged.
But there is another possible facet to this aspect. We would all agree that the general commitment of the client to do breakthrough work is not very high atleast for most of the clients. We can see this in the time and money spent of improving the little details and clients are happy with broad brush strokes announcing this or that fact of the product.
I have a question here when you see the scam ad does it make sense to your or not? Does the ad convey the brand values in a superior manner or not? Is it in any manner more interesting and engaging than the mainstream work? If the answer to any of these questions is yes, and then answer why is this work not mainstream. And the answer my friend is blowing in the wind.
I honestly believe great advertising is created by clients and is incidentally done in the agency offices.
Scam advertising is not encouraged by the agencies but the clients made it a compulsion.
From Pooja Kapoor, Wed 09 Apr 2008 07:50:55 AM Mr. Khandekar, I agree with every word written by you in this article.
I'm glad someone as senior as you came up with this. I just hope that it wakes up the bigwigs of the industry and make them stand up for what they think is right.
