"Best". Yeah right.

I received an e-mail about an event being presented by the AMA next week. A screening of award-winning ads from Cannes.

The tagline from the e-mail:
"See the world's best advertising. Where the ideas are big and the logos are small."

I can't stand (most) advertising industry awards. Their definition of "best" is exactly why traditional marketing budgets are cut so quickly by the bean counters. It's also why so many billions of dollars are moving to (highly accountable) online channels.

I would define "the world's best advertising" as advertising that strongly communicates a brand's identity AND presents a call-to-action that successfully encourages the target audience to (directly or indirectly) do something that benefits the brands long-term goals.

In fact, I would go even further. I wouldn't just consider how well the ad conveys the desired message, but also how well it even reaches the right people in order to convey that message. In other words, it's not just about the creative department.

Instead, the presenters, sponsors, judges, and participants in awards shows are more likely to define "best" as the prettiest or funniest. That's it.

The above tagline really shows how a lot of so-called creative people think. If it were up to them, they wouldn't show the client's logo at all. Actually, in their perfect world, the client wouldn't be involved in the process at all.

At a conference I attended a couple of years ago, someone in the audience made an excellent point during a session about the creative process. In a nutshell, he said "Unfortunately, most advertising isn't about being creative; it's about being clever. Clever gets attention, but creative makes an impact."