A common creative trick is to use a picture of something that also looks like something else to make your point. It was all the rage a few years ago, but thankfully has calmed down a little because it was starting to get silly. Anyway, this website posts everyday photos of stuff that also looks like faces. I can’t believe some of them haven’t been tampered with, funny though: http://www.facesinplaces.blogspot.com/

Last year in the RAD Awards supplement, an agency ran an ad saying that the only reward they really value is their client’s happiness. Regardless of how sincere you think this sentiment is, it does raise an important point.

Over the years, I’ve seen work win awards that, while creatively beautiful, had such sparse and small copy text that it’s impossible to see how candidates could possibly figure out what the job was about. These win awards purely for their aesthetic and conceptual beauty.

Now, the multi-award winning, uber-agencies would make the point that this beautiful work is actually most effective and that’s why they do it. Sometime they’re right, but sometimes they’re being completely gratuitous. I love beautiful artwork, but every year I look at some of this stuff and think to myself that an agency has persuaded the client to invest thousands of pounds in a lump of glass and an ego-boost.

Judgement calls are made for aesthetic, rather than practical reasons. My biggest bugbear is 8 point white text on a four colour background. Sure, it looks great boarded up, but is illegible in any newspaper.

As an ex-judge, I saw first-hand how little credence is given to effectiveness or practicalities, it’s all about the idea and the execution. There is no way on earth that a slightly less visually pleasing, but more effective advert, would beat a more attractive, less effective, competitor. I wish we could change the criteria and make it more about how a problem was solved rather than the fact that an illustrator on £200 per hour was used.

The stronger, more challenging clients want you to get results and solve their problems. If you can do it with style and elegance, that’s fine too. But they put their ego on hold and focus on the job, awards are the last thing on their mind. We’re the arty ones.

I guess my question after six paras of ranting is: Does the way awards are judged encourage agencies to take their clients down a less effective, more beautiful path?

Answers on a stamped address envelope please.

Actually, we’re sorting out blog comments at the moment, so hopefully in the future you’ll be able to respond. Unless of course I’m all alone . . . . . . . .