Kancil Awards 2007: Insights into Judging

kancil-annual-2007_02.jpg

(Image courtesy of kancilawards.com)

Last night, I attended a special session called ‘Insights into Judging’ that was organized by the 4As and 95% The Advertising Academy.

It was a basically a debrief on how the judges picked the metal winners for this year’s Kancil Awards.

I was curious and had a million questions that I wanted to ask Jury Chairman Edmund Choe about, like:

“What was your international benchmark for great interactive work?”

“Which agency inspired you the most this year?”

“Do you think that the advertising industry has a preference for awarding Golds to Flash websites?”

But halfway through the presentation, something happened that really put me off the whole thing.

It was when one of the judges said that effectiveness wasn’t a criteria that they were looking for in a winning campaign.

To be fair, the Kancil Awards is a creative awards festival. And things like ‘effectiveness’ probably don’t matter when it comes to getting creative directors to blush and fawn over your entries.

But my line of work, digital advertising, is founded on effectiveness.

The success of web campaigns are measured on the basis of effectiveness and everything on your banner ad or website can be tracked, analyzed and cataloged to a T.

And creativity is not merely in the presentation, but in the structure, too.

And it goes without saying; the more usable and accessible your work is, the more people you reach.

After hearing what the judge said about ‘effectiveness’ I felt like going home and doing something a little more productive with my time. Like hauling out my MIDI controller and making some beats.

Oh well.

I guess we’ve still got a long way to go until a CD says something like “Hey, I think that website deserves an award because I checked it out with my iPhone and it looks awesome. It even prints properly!”

Hahaha.

Advertisements

9 Comments

Filed under Advertising, Awards, Events, Trends

9 responses to “Kancil Awards 2007: Insights into Judging

  1. I suppose that’s why we have awards for creativity or business and none which rewards ‘effectiveness’ in Malaysia.

    Nonetheless, effectiveness does win over creativity on the Internet now…anytime. For example; why does easy to use applications sell better than nice looking albeit difficult to use applications. So obvious… 😛

  2. Suffian Rahman

    Totally agree with you, Danny.

    Btw I can’t wait to get an iPhone, too!

  3. Boss, buy me an iPhone also can? 😀

  4. Justin

    Actually, there is a Marketing Effectiveness Awards every year. The last one was won by DiGi (Yellow Man). Don;t be disheartened. Try for it next year.

  5. Suffian Rahman

    Thanks, Justin.

    I just felt that the basis for judging the Web hasn’t reached the level of something like the Webby Awards, which is perhaps the closest thing to an industry standard for online work.

    But yeah, there’s always next year. =)

  6. For no strange reasons, i couldn’t care less about how they judge the kancil awards. It’s a traditional advertising awards show, always has been and always will be.

    Just like for example, if the Webby Awards judges would have judged a, say, Radio ad, I’d bet 9 out 10 would have chosen the one that used the least airtime to convey the message and in the most friendliest design possible. That’s how we “digital” think.

    “Traditional” people think differently.

    I mean..

    a “Digital” won’t give much respect to another “Digital” who’s got a Kancil or Cannes etc etc. Just like a “Traditional” won’t with another “Traditional” who’s got a Webby or FWA or SXSW etc etc. It’s a irrelevant award to them.

    But, for a “digital” or “traditional” whois able to win both type of awards, that’s respect.

    Versatility is the keyword here.

    It ain’t easy for a “traditional” to switch mindset to win a Webby award, but there’s some who have. And I doubt they’re going around complaining about how tough it was to also be anally judged on effectiveness and usability-accessibility-coding jargons rather than just they’re kickass art-direction and copywriting.

    And I think it’s cool too that sometimes we “digitals” take off our tightly screwed thinking caps and just go crazy buckwild and utterly un-user-friendly on some of our web projects for the sake of creative expression and interaction experimentalism. As long as that website ain’t for proper use of course, like microsites and such. Stuff traditional awards judges love.

  7. @Ari

    Great point about switching hats there, dude.

    But I doubt I could switch my “Let’s make a site that lasts long enough for my grandkids to see it!” hat for a “Fuck it, let’s just do a crazy-ass Flash site with a fucking annoying pencil for navigation!” hat.

    I get your point, though.

    But in the real-life, I think I’ve already made my share of concessions to ‘traditional’ web design. I’ve occasionally had to let web standards slip because some programmer couldn’t do cross-browser testing properly or some designer thought CSS was not cool enough for them.

    It obviously sucks when you have to close an eye because other people aren’t into the shit you’re into. Haha.

  8. Pingback: 5 things I learned at Adfest 2008 « (dis)information architecture

  9. Pingback: Thank You for Reading « (dis)information architecture

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s