A transcript from a heated debate on advertising’s dark secret

The following is a transcript of a live debate held at the Kaufman Music Center on New York City on March 20, 2015.

///

Debaters:

Sam Roarke, CEO and Founder, RoarkeSmith & Partners

Kiet Som Kwok, Chief Creative Officer, Anagram8

Moderator:

John Phillips, Host of NPR’s Media Runs

///

John Phillips: Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Live Debate Series at the Kaufman Center. Tonight, we’ve invited two esteemed guests to verbally joust about, what may be, the biggest secret of a multi-billion dollar industry. No, we’re not talking about Wall Street, or energy, or politics. Folks, tonight, we’re talking about advertising. Yes, folks, advertising.

Today, more than ever, advertising is all around us. eMarketer estimated that $546 billion dollars — billions with a “b” — was spent last year in advertising and media worldwide. With that much money at stake, controversy is inevitable to arise and arise one has.

It’s what advertising people call “scam advertising.” Fabricated, un-commissioned ads created with the explicit purpose of grabbing prospective clients’ attention…and business. Ads for the sake of ads.

Scam ads. Some despise it, others see it as a necessary — even virtuous — part of a cutthroat business.

But which is it?

Well, that sounds like the makings of a lively debate. Tonight, we have two titans of advertising to settle this motion once and for all: Scam ads healthy for the creativity.

JP: Introducing our first debater, Sam Roarke, arguing against the motion. Sam, last year, Fast Company named your agency, RoarkeSmith & Partners, one of the ten most influential companies in media. Your campaigns have graced the covers of Time and Wired, drawing both public acclaim and controversy. So, my question is this: how do you do it?

Sam Roarke: With a lot of drinking.

(Applause)

But seriously, John, I’ve been very lucky throughout my career to be surrounded by very passionate people who love what they do. And who believe in doing “real” work…

JP: Hang on, hang on. Sounds like you’re already jumping into the action — just hang on a second while I introduce our other guest.

Ladies and gentlemen, arguing for the motion, is the Chief Creative Officer at Anagram8. It’s safe to say that Anagram8 has been this decade’s rocket ship in advertising — rising from relative obscurity to top of the Cannes Creativity Awards tables in just five years. And that success has be the led by our next titan: Kiet Som Kwok. Kiet, what does that kind of meteoric ascension feel like?

Kiet Som Kwok: Honestly, thrilling and terrifying. I have to agree with my friend Sam, drinking helps.

(Applause)

JP: I sense a theme here but let’s go with it.

Tonight will be an Oxford-format debate. Which means we will start with opening statements followed by dialogue and questions from the audience. Finally, I will give each guest two minutes to make his final argument. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a debate — there will be a winner and a loser.

You’ve already been asked for a vote at the beginning of the night. At the end of the night, you’ll be asked again and whichever debater has moved the most votes — wins the night.

Our debaters have flipped a coin backstage and fate has decided that Sam will be first to make his opening statement. Sam, you have two minutes to argue against the motion: Scam ads healthy for the creativity.

SR: Thanks John. Folks, this is a complex issue for which I have an extremely simple argument: We are professionals and professionals should not be rewarded for doing fake work. That’s what scam advertising is — fake work. It is deceit, plain and simple. Let’s not sugar coat what it is.

Let me back-up for a second and define the term “scam ad.”

Normally, in advertising, a client pays an agency to create a piece of work — a TV ad, a radio ad, a digital banner — to help sell whatever it is they’re selling. It can be a gruelling process as conservative Clients often limit how creative the agency can be. Because of this tension, the vast majority of an agency’s work does not get what any agency creative — like any creative person — really wants: fame and recognition.

A scam ad is simply a ploy to cheat this reality. It’s an ad that an agency conjures up out of thin air. It is unpaid and unauthorized by the client. A brand logo is simply slapped on and it is submitted to win one of many industry awards.

Yes, a scam ad is free from the constraints of the client’s conservative-ness, but ultimately, it is also free from truth. It is not a real piece of work. It is not a professional product.

Multiply this behavior by the tens of thousands of agencies in the world all doing scam and you arrive the sad state of affairs we have today: an industry infected by fake work and shiny awards created to reward that work.

Folks, is this what we want to be known for? Is this what we want to be? A multi-billion dollar, professional industry that rewards itself on doing fake work? If it sounds dirty, that’s because it is. That’s why I ask of you to vote for against the proposition: Scam ads are not healthy for creativity.

(Applause)

JP: Thank you, Sam. Kiet, it’s your floor to offer your side of the issue. You have two minutes.

KSK: Thanks John and thank you for everyone for coming tonight.

I have to admit, I agree with a lot of what Sam says. But I’ll also say, that this is not a simple black-or-white, right-or-wrong issue. I am also first to say that scam ads do exist. But I can’t help to feel like Sam’s outlook on creativity is — simply outdated.

Now, I’ll tell you what Sam is going to tell you. He’s going to say that scam ads are to advertising like steroids to major league baseball. It’s a form of cheating and the industry’s obsession on winning awards diminishes advertising’s true value as a business tool.

It’s true that as a creative leader, I am constantly thinking about winning awards. But the question is this: is that an unhealthy obsession?

Absolutely not.

The fact of the matter is, our industry’s “Super Bowl” event is called Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity for a reason. It’s a celebration of creativity. Unadulterated brilliance. It’s not a festival for best client relationships or a festival for the biggest media budgets, it’s a celebration of creative possibility. Of big ideas. It’s a platform for inspiring clients and the industry as a whole. And in that way, all ideas — scam or not — should be fair game.

Sam uses the word “scam” like dirty word. I don’t see it that way. I love work that is demonstrates what a brand can do without shackles. I love brave work. It’s proof that great work is always possible — right below the surface — and the optimism that that injects into the industry should be rewarded. To me, it’s not scam, it’s proactive creativity. It’s the best way to raise the tide of the entire industry which otherwise would be doing the same, boring things year after year.

So yes. Vote yes to the motion: scam ads — or proactive creativity, as I see it — are healthy for creativity.

(Applause)

JP: Thank you to both debaters. I can tell already that we will have a spirited debate tonight. Now, we’re entering the open dialogue part of the debate and I’d like to start with a question to Sam. Actually, a question that seems to be at the heart of this debate for both sides.

Sam, you see scam ads as a black or white issue where Kiet sees it as a complex issue. Can you tell Kiet — and us — why it’s much simpler than he’s making it out to be? Why scam ads are, without question, bad for creativity?

SR: I’ll say what I said before: fake work is wrong work. Advertising is the only professional industry that rewards itself on completely fabricated work. Should doctors be rewarded for doing fake surgeries? Or exterminators rewarded if they pretend to exterminate your bedbugs but — just kidding, they didn’t?

And it’s become so obvious to everyone what is scam and what is real. You look at the media plan and if the ad has only run once on some obscure channel at some obscure time — I mean, no marketer would do that. It’s delusional to reward work like…

KSK: I just want to jump in for a second. I hear this argument a lot — how a scam is scam because it only airs once. I just don’t see that a reason to call something a scam. Consider the biggest advertising event in the world — the Super Bowl. Tens of millions of people watching the ads — all of which…just…air…once.

(Applause)

If Super Bowl ads are scam — which they are clearly not — but if they were, then scam is all I want to do.

SR: I think we can all agree that Super Bowl ads are the exception in our business. By definition, they cannot be scam because…

KSK: Again, definition is important here. Sam, what you’re calling “scam,” could just be an agency being very proactive with a client and bringing ideas to him without being asked. That’s the level of assertiveness needed to do great work and it should be acknowledged.

Sam, the only thing separating what you’re defining as “scam” and what I’m calling “proactivity” is how willing you to put yourself out there.

Is it scam to bring an idea to a client outside the typical process? What if that idea is actually effective? What if the client ultimately likes it and approves it? What if it makes a real difference to the brand? To the real world? No, that’s not scam, that’s what I call an front-footed approach to producing great ideas.

SR: Being proactive is one thing. Making ads with the sole purpose of winning awards is another.

Advertising is a business tool that, when done well, has real impact of brands. Scam ads — ads made without considering the client’s stated objectives — diminish the value of real ads that do.

You poked fun at client management before. But the truth is, it’s much harder to make a “real” great ad, than a fake one — and that’s what should be recognized. That’s the real value of real advertising — the ability to get a crazy idea into the real world despite a client’s concerns. Just making things up disrespects that process. It’s the easy way out. It’s cheating.

Frankly, I’d take a mediocre “real” ad over a great scam any day — because authenticity matters. When real client money is at stake, real ads should be the only thing that win these awards.

(Applause)

KSK: Sam, you talk so much about “real.” You do realize that all creativity, all advertising is made up, right? Sure, it’s a business tool, but is it’s also art. It’s art for commerce. It’s made up. If “real” is all you want, we’d have ads that just state facts — cleans faster, works better — that’s not creativity, that’s not what inspires people and that’s not what helps brands.

(Applause)

JP: Let’s take a question from the audience. I know we must have some people from the industry here tonight and I’d love see what they have to say.

Over there, in the third row.

Audience Member: Hi, my name is Dan Kapur and I’m currently an art director working in Singapore. I’m a fan of both of your work, but my question is this…actually, it’s more for Kiet.

I’m often asked by my creative director to do nothing but what Sam is calling “scam ads” — especially when awards season rolls around. He knows it’s not real client work and I know it, too — but honestly, I’m open to do it because it helps my portfolio. But at the same time, I know what’s happening. I mean, my question is…what am I supposed to do in that situation?

JP: I feel like that’s a really good question. At the end of the day, there are real, hardworking people behind these ads — real or not. So Kiet, what would say to Dan?

KSK: Do it. Like I said, I see these award shows as a global platform for the best creative work, period. You have to admit, most of the time you’re doing work you’re not particularly proud of — this is your opportunity to put your best thinking forward. You’re competing with the best in the world and if you win, it’s good for you personally, good for your creative director and good for your agency…

SR: I simply cannot believe Kiet is saying this. We, the industry, are breeding an entire generation of creative people who don’t know how to make real ads. Who believe the only way to advance their careers is to win meaningless metal statues for work that clients didn’t ask for. That’s not advertising, what you’re encouraging are art projects.

(Applause)

KSK: You know what? My friend over there is being a bit naive. Really naive, actually. This is simply not how the advertising industry works these days. Winning awards — like it or not — is one of the most important vehicles to attracting new clients in our business. To grow an agency. And trying to win awards — like it or not — is a cost of business. It’s an agency’s R&D — it’s an business investment. And that’s not meaningless.

Sam, if I told you that for every one million dollars you invested in trying to win these awards, you’d get a five million dollar return in attracting new business — you’re telling me you wouldn’t do that? That, you wouldn’t invest that money? Because that’s how most agencies see what you’re calling “scam” — proactive creativity that can have a real impact on an agency.

SR: In a word, no. I would not do that…

KSK: Then, my friend, maybe not today or tomorrow — you will be left behind. The industry has changed…

SR: That’s probably what A-Rod thought. Listen, scam ads is a form of cheating and, for me, no amount of supposed glory is worth cheating for.

(Applause)

JP: Let’s take one more question from the audience. Ma’am, in the back.

Audience Member: Hello, my name is Ivy Beck. I’ve got to admit, I don’t work in advertising — so I’ve never even heard about this scam ad issue until tonight.

It’s interesting, but I guess my question has to do with addressing the original proposition about if it’s healthy for creativity. As an outsider, I can you both take this on directly? I haven’t heard that yet.

JP: I’ll let Kiet tackle this first.

KSK: It’s a good question. To me, as a creative leader of an organization, the best way to raise the creative bar amongst my guys is to have them compete with the best. That’s what these awards are: competitions. Healthy competitions, because it forces you, as a creative, to step back and up your game. It’s motivating, challenging and when you succeed, incredibly rewarding.

You know, creativity is like a muscle. You have to work it to strengthen it and that’s what these competitions do — exercise that muscle. So, for me, it’s, quite literally, healthy for creativity because it’s ups everyone’s game.

SR: I’ll make the baseball analogy again. Did steroids “up everyone’s game?” Indeed, it did. Was it healthy for the game of baseball? Absolutely not. It almost destroyed it.

Look people, I have no issues with competition, but that competition cannot exist for its own sake. And most importantly, the competition has to be fair.

If you’re an agency, like ours, that refuses to do scam ads — you are competing with cheaters. How fair is that? And the more the happens, the less and less real work will compete and the more and more ridiculous these awards will become. That vicious cycle has already started and it’s hurting our industry as a whole.

KSK: Sam, that’s simply not true. Except for the Great Recession, advertising spend has steadily increased every year since the 1970's. The industry has never been more dynamic or creative. Digital, social, mobile are creating more possibilities to grow brands than ever before because there are more canvases than ever before. Developing countries are thriving. Call me an optimist, but scam ads, awards shows — you and me — won’t slow that down. Creativity is more valuable than ever.

(Applause)

JP: And with that we close the dialogue segment of tonight’s debate.

It’s been a spirited debate and now it’s time for closing statements. Each of you will have two minutes to make your final argument. Sam, you had the first word, so I’ll give Kiet the final say. That means, Sam, you’ll make the first closing statement. You have two minutes.

SR: Twenty-eight million dollars. That’s how much Cannes collected last in award submissions…the largest ever and growing at 5% a year. It’s not an award show, it’s big business. And I’m sad to say, as long it continues to be big business, scam ads will continue to tarnish the value of creativity.

We cannot honestly call ourselves a professional industry when we obsess over things that have nothing to do with our client’s real problems. No client hires an agency for fake work, this is not artistic patronage — advertising is a service business that deserves real creative work.

Scam ads, awards shows, judging panels — the current industry apparatus — have warped what it means to “do” advertising. It delegitimizes us all.

Yes, getting clients to buy ideas is hard. Yes, great ideas are rare. Yes, why suffer when there’s an easier way out? But we have to ask ourselves, what kind of industry we want to be? An industry that rewards big ideas that have real results? Or one, so inwardly focused, that it champions beautiful lies?

So, I ask you — no I beg of you, please vote against the motion. Scam ares are not healthy for creativity.

(Applause)

JP: And now, Kiet, you have the final word. Two minutes.

KSK: Thanks John and thanks to Sam for engaging in such an important issue with such passion. I just want to say this: I wasn’t always the Chief Creative Officer of a big ad agency.

My first gig in advertising was an a tiny shop in Hong Kong nobody ever heard of.

The truth of the matter is: great creativity is the ultimate equalizer. Awards are the little guys’ sling shot. Awards shows are one of the few places where the best ideas do shine through, period. It is a slingshot. It was my slingshot.

Without these awards and without the opportunity to showcase your creativity without constraints, the big agencies will simpler get bigger and the small guys will never have a chance.

What Sam’s calls “scam,” I call pluck. I call proactivity. I call purity. I call punching above your weight. I salute the junior creative doing scam because I salute, not only his talent, but his ambition. And if scam ads are his best chance in this crazy, super competitive, unfair industry, then so be it. I salute scam ads, too.

Vote for the motion: Scam ads — no, proactivity— are healthy for creativity.

(Applause)

JP: And with that, I conclude the main segment of tonight’s debate.

Ladies and gentlemen in the audience, the choice is yours. Please pick up the voting devices in front of you and enter your second vote of the evening.

Again, the debater who moved the most votes will be declared tonight’s winner. The motion is this: Scam ads are healthy for creativity. Please enter your vote.

///

(This debate is, itself, a scam. However, the issues are real and affecting the advertising industry today.)