Cannes: Why doesn't India roar with the Lions? Part II

In the first part of this two-part feature, we had explored whether Indian advertising is below par. Here, we analyze whether our advertising is good in the Indian context... and if so, should we really care about Cannes

(Continued from yesterday.)

An intriguing thing about Cannes and the Clios in the recent years has been the explosion of good work from South America, especially Brazilian agencies. The point is, how is that work so popular among international juries? "I'm amazed at the kind of work that comes out of there," says Freddy Birdy of Mudra Communications. "And what surprises me is that we are the closest to Brazil when it comes to things like consumerist cultures, employment levels, education. We have the closest cultural fit with Brazil, yet we are not coming up with as good ideas. I think it's because the people there are more talented and are trying harder."

McCann-Erickson's Nikhil Nehru finds the comparison tenuous. "I don't think one can draw such parallels between South America and India. We may be similar in things like poverty, income levels et cetera, but these are only economic indicators. The mindset and psyche is quite different. We are in different stages of evolution. South America is that much more westernized, and their agencies think in the westernized context."

"Brazil and South Africa do a lot of work aimed at the juries," is how Thomas Xavier of Orchard Advertising explains it. "Quite a few of them are ‘legitimate scams'. They get most of these ads done for a low price, and they get the client to release it, maybe once. Now people here are thinking, ‘I could do that', and they're doing so. Most of the work that wins at the Abby Awards is work most of the audience hasn't even seen. Once the quality of these campaigns goes up slightly, we will do well at Cannes." Of course, he agrees that some of the work from South America "is genuine and we must learn from it".

"Brazilian advertising is bold and inventive within the western context. Their subjects are global in appeal, unlike Indian advertising, whose cultural ethos is, in western opinion, ‘cute and exotic'," adds Ajay Chandwani of SSC&B.

Talking of the Indian cultural ethos and advertising in the Indian context, it might be recalled that in an interview with agencyfaqs!, Ranjan Kapur, managing director, Ogilvy & Mather India, had drawn attention to why O&M's work in India does not set the pulse racing among international juries. "I think it is a function of the fact that we have very relevant Indian work… sometimes to the extent that it is totally ethnic," he had said. "It works terrifically in an Indian context, but because it's ethnic, it doesn't find too much favour with the international jury."

Nehru is in total agreement. "Some of our work is brilliant in the Indian context. You must realize that most Indian ads - even those for MNC brands - takes into account the Indian ethos, even where ads follow a global strategy. The ads have to work in India, so they have to be local in a way that each one touches the consumer. I think we are doing the right thing. Winning awards abroad is just a bonus. I'd much rather we did good work that talks to the Indian consumer, rather than a global jury."

"The primary job of advertising is to make sense to the target audience," Thomas is in sync. "Everything else is a bonus. The only appeal an ad should have is ‘consumer appeal'. The only way forward for Indian advertising, if we want to be fair to our clients, is to be ourselves and do better and better work… and ‘educate' the Cannes jury simultaneously. Otherwise, we will have ads that - like the art films of the '70s - win abroad, but fail to find an audience here." And by educating juries, what Thomas means is, things like Mohammed Khan's talk in Cannes on how campaigns like Pepsi's ‘Mera number aayega' should be viewed in the proper perspective.

Freddy agrees that the Indian context is relevant. But he doesn't subscribe to the view that good ideas could be victims of cultural or geographical limitations. "A good idea transcends barriers of culture and country," he says. And he blames both agencies and clients for not being brave enough, when it comes to breaking away from the tested. "Clients are not sure whether Indian audiences are ready for cutting-edge creativity. Frankly, our audiences are sick of the kind of advertising we do. One can argue that here, the consumer's maturity is low, which is why we do advertising that doesn't win at Cannes. But tell me, if tomorrow India wins three Lions at Cannes, would it mean the audience has matured overnight? These are only excuses."

"The Indian consumer is mature enough to respond to bolder or more creative communication," Chandwani feels. "Both clients and agencies somehow believe that successful advertising is a mirror of the past. There is very little desire to be inventive and innovative. Unless the self-imposed shackles are removed, Indian advertising will languish at the sub-optimal levels."

"You can't question the consumer's maturity," Thomas insists. "If she is not swayed by your ad, it's not her fault. Creative in advertising begins and ends with the consumer. By all means try to move her forward. But don't blame her if she doesn't."

Having said all this, the one question is, how vital is it for India to win at Cannes? Shouldn't we be content with making advertising that sells in the market? Does Cannes really matter?

"It does, but not more than the consumer," Nehru is categorical. Thomas believes it's very important purely because it helps benchmark the quality of Indian work. "It helps us constantly question what we are doing, especially in the area of the craft," he says.

Chandwani too sees it as important, from the test-of-creative-craftsmanship standpoint. "Effective advertising - even of other countries - does not get rewarded in these festivals. We need to make progress both in craftsmanship and effectiveness. Only then will the general standards of advertising improve. Today, with no Cannes winners, what does Indian advertising look up to as role model campaigns? International festivals set standards for us to emulate."

The point is, why distinguish between ‘creative' and ‘effective'? Does it always have to be an either-or tradeoff? After all, Budweiser's ‘Wassup?' campaign (last year's Grand Prix winner at Cannes) is reported to be a huge success, even in the market place. As Freddy sums it up, "You might be selling well in the market. But a better creative might sell even better in the market. Until you try being creative, you'll never find out."

© 2001 agencyfaqs!