Why Ad Competitions Suck

From PDNOnline yesterday: Best Photo Ads of the Cannes Lions

The problem with ad contests is that the winning ads usually weren't created to sell stuff. They were created to win contests. The distinction is subtle, but it changes the way you feel about the work. It's kind of like how a movie is more powerful when you know it's based on a true story.

Still, competitions serve a purpose. Message-sensitive clients can keep dishing out safe but bland advertising to the masses, and agencies have a place to show off the fun stuff to their peers. Some of their best work might have run only on one bus shelter in Germany.

But what happens when an ad wins that was never meant to be seen? That becomes a sensation on the Internet for all the wrong reasons? That the client AND the ad agency are both forced to denounce? Yep, that happened. This week JCPenney and Saatchi are actually trying to recall a commercial that won a Bronze Cannes Lion.

The spot, "Speed Dressing," is very good. But it evokes teen sex. Whoops! Compared to Unilever's multi-agency Axe Effect campaign (a perennial contest winner), this commercial is downright sweet. But it's way off the charts for Penney's. The store said it never saw the ad until it won the contest and called it "inapporpriate."

Still unclear is how the commercial got entered into Cannes. The Wall Street Journal reports that Saatchi claims the ad was created "without J.C. Penney's knowledge or consent...Saatchi & Saatchi did not enter the spot and deeply regrets the message this ad presents." There are a few oddball scenarios under which that statement could be technically true, such as the commercial is a test and was entered in the contest by the production company with Saatchi's credits on it.

Looks like this is JCPenney's Miley Cyrus moment. And so we wonder again: A mistake, or a crafty strategic move?