Viewed in a wider perspective this whole issue about the Chillies is a reflection of a deep-seated social malaise. To my mind, this sagged Chillies saga is in fact an expression of the wanton disregard for values, lack of integrity and unconcealed arrogance that our society is saddled with today.
Genesis
Chillies was born out of deception and opportunism. The Sri Lanka Institute of Marketing had conducted annual SLIM awards since 1988 and this was done in a dignified manner with due deference to certain principles. There have been some flaws of course. In 2006, a few agency personnel demanded that judging criteria should be based on 100% creativity, rather than the 80-20 ratio for creativity and effectiveness respectively. They wanted 100% creativity, and essentially said ‘to hell with 20% for effectiveness’.
Just a pretext
This was all a pretext to destroy the SLIM Awards which they found difficult to control totally. And ultimately they did destroy it. This is how the Chillies came into being. Scams reigned supreme at the awards thereabter. This is not at all without a precedent. Just one year abter SLIM initiated the advertising awards in 1988 (when our industry was much smaller) a group of agency people got together and started yet another awards event – which they called OLA. The first OLA Awards was so stinking and scandalous, it died a natural death. As I have said before, Chillies is a reincarnation of OLA.
Why interim orders by Courts?
Currently, allegations are being circulated by certain parties that Phoenix Ogilvy's prime intention was to prevent the Chillies from being held under any circumstances. This is patently false and malicious and merely underlines the tactics resorted to by members of certain Chillies committees. Phoenix Ogilvy's only demand was that we are not discriminated against, but allowed to participate in the Chillies 2010, as we have done since 2007. Since all pleas for commonsense and justice to all the Committees failed, we were forced to seek redress else where.
The determination was quite clear. It was to compel the organizers to accept the entries of Phoenix Ogilvy and proceed. The moment we obtained the court order last Thursday morning (May 6, 2010) we communicated this to the Awards Secretariat and also informed them that our entries are ready for submission any time.
They had ample time to verify, screen and present them for the judging that was scheduled for May 8 to 16, 2010. They decided, however, that they would rather cancel Chillies than accept our entries; when the proper course of action should have been to take the court decision in the right spirit, rectify the error and move forward. In the end, Chillies 2010 was brought to an abrupt end by a handful of egotistic, arrogant, short-sighted people, whose pride was more important than the betterment of the industry.
Trustees and Blue Print Report
The controversial Blue Print Report was never shown to the Trustees by the Blue Print Committee Chairman or the Presidents of 4 As or IAA. The Trustees did not know that the Blue Print Committee had made membership of 4As and IAA mandatory for agencies to participate. Mr. Imal Fonseka, Chairman of the Trustees, expressed his deep concern about these new stipulations when I brought this matter to his notice. So did Mr. Rajeev Meewakkala.
This is one clear indication of the arbitrary and high-handed manner in which certain individuals have acted in matters relating to the Chillies. Furthering personal agendas seems to have been the overriding objective for them.
Invitations
We received two invitations to join either 4 As or IAA from the two parties. These invitations were included in our plaint. Mr. Romesh De Silva, President’s Counsel, read out these two letters in court. The decision not to secure membership of these two organizations was based on a matter of principle. The court recognized the fact that people can take a principled position with regard to issues such as this.
Non-participation
The allegation that Phoenix Ogilvy does not participate in or contribute to the activities of 4 As and IAA is patently false. Although we are not members of either of these two organizations, we have participated in activities outside the Awards conducted under the aegis of 4As and IAA whenever invited. For example, our Executive Creative Director, Sujoy Roy, was a speaker at the Cannes Workshop. On that occasion he spoke on best pieces of work and also judged the Young Lions. Our Creative Director, Ransley Burrows, judged at the Young Lotus for ADFEST. Our Creative Director, David Blacker, was on the 4As panel at a seminar on Cannes Print Work in 2008. In the following year Blacker was a judge on a Chillies Selection Panel for the Roger Hatchueal Workshop.
Anti-scam regulations
We have no issue with such regulations. In fact we welcome such initiatives. We have always stood against scam ads and any regulation to curb these will receive our fullest support. We are seeing a tightening of screws the world over when it comes to scam ads in Advertising Awards. This is a healthy development and we applaud it.
Has Phoenix benefited from Chillies?
The assumption that Phoenix has benefited from such participation cannot be further from the truth. The agencies which benefited from Chillies were those of scam-fame.
This is precisely why the seven agency heads met in my office on the eve of Chillies 2008 to discuss various irregularities and malpractices committed by the self-appointed custodians of the Awards. The irony is that the Chairman of the Blue Print Committee and the present Presidents of 4 As and IAA were also present at this meeting.
Future of Advertising Awards
Awards ignite creativity and passion, and thereby raise the bar in the industry. However if such noble objectives are to be achieved the process cannot be handled by a “mafia”, but rather a professional body as was the case earlier. What is needed is for an organization such as the Sri Lanka Institute of Marketing (who conducted the SLIM Awards for some 17 years) to launch a new Awards event. |
E-mail
