Abby Awards 2005: Organisers, agencies kiss & make up

For a little while, it seemed that Abby Awards 2005 would be mired in controversy. Some ad agencies were upset when the Club’s judging committee got in touch with a few of them and asked for a certificate of authentication from their clients on stamp paper to accompany their award entries. The issue has been settled – at least for this year. The agencies now need only furnish an authentication certificate on the client’s letterhead.

According to Ad Club sources, asking agencies to submit client certificates on stamp paper had become necessary because of a significant increase in what the Club's judging committee interprets as ‘suspect advertising.’ One particular source maintains that as much as 45 per cent of print entries this year may not be authentic. “We discovered a whole host of ads that have been released in December, only once and that too in obscure publications,” he says.

Bal Palekar, chairperson of the Abby Awards judging committee, goes a step further to say this trend encompasses almost all product categories, across both print and television. “I wouldn’t really call them suspect ads. Yet, we were concerned when we stumbled across ads for national level products in district level publications,” he explains.

Now, the advertising industry is no stranger to ‘ghost ads’ or ‘scam ads’. In fact, every year, advertising award organisers, juries and ad agencies end up at loggerheads trying to resolve differences over 'scam ads'. What adds to the mayhem is the fact that there are as many definitions of the phrase ‘scam ad’ as there are of ‘creativity’ and ‘advertising’.

This year, however, the crisis over alleged scam ads has been far more serious. Instead of simply weeding out proven scam ads like it happens every year, the Ad Club wanted to settle the issue once and for all. As is expected, the Ad Club's move to ask agencies to furnish an authentication certificate from clients on a stamp paper took the ad industry by surprise and ruffled enough feathers.

“This is absolutely ridiculous as no client would agree to sign on a stamp paper, as there are legal implications to this,” fumed one creative head. Others termed the move as “humiliating” and “impractical”.

The Ad Club, on its part, maintained that the move was aimed at sending a strong signal to the industry that things were getting out of hand. However, a section of the industry continued with its protests. “Not only is there very little time to arrange for the document, it is also difficult to convince the client to sign on it,” said one national creative director. “Also, what it implies is that the Ad Club does not respect the authentication of the agency head and the implicit approval of the client.”

What had seemingly irked some ad professionals is the manner in which the Ad Club demanded the authentication. “The Ad Club should have spelled out its intention when it called for entries, and not at the last hour” -- was the common consensus. “We spend a good amount of money entering these awards; the Ad Club people can’t just change the rules of the game at any time it suits them,” one creative director growled.

With the entire issue threatening to go out of hand, the scrutiny committee met on Tuesday evening to take stock of the situation. The committee has since decided to waive the stamp paper clause – at least for this year.

Says Palekar, “As far as we are concerned, we have decided to remove the stamp paper clause only for this year. Instead, we have asked the agencies to get the client’s approval on a company letterhead.”

He cites a few reasons for this change in stance. “We realised the time constraint involved, and the fact that the authority to sign on a legal document rested with only a handful of people at the clients' end.”

A section of the industry has welcomed the new decision. It sees no real problem in procuring the client’s authentication on a letterhead.

The Ad Club, however, is not willing to let the matter die down and is intent on looking for a long-term solution. “We have sent out letters to all agency heads, asking their opinion on how to curb the tide of these ads. We are waiting for their suggestions,” Palekar adds, implying that the 'scam ad' issue will not be swept under the carpet this time 'round. “After all, the Ad Club is the face of the advertising industry and we have to be very transparent in our dealings.”

It's apparent that a head-on collision has been averted. But the bigger issues of what constitute ‘scam ads’ and how it needs to be dealt with continue to beg attention.

© 2005 agencyfaqs!