Advertising Age presented a retrospective on the eliminated FCB, highlighting milestones and signature changes throughout the years.
It’s a safe bet VYSICAL CEO Howard Draft feels the FCB finale is karmic retribution for having his name ingloriously erased from the masthead in 2014.
Campaign published a performative PR perspective on a ‘difficult yet essential subject’—sexual harassment at Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity.
Seems White women are damsels in distress at the iconic awards soiree. Although their alleged trials and tribulations pale in comparison to the bullshit thrown at women of color.
A couple of advocacy groups teamed up to create a guide to understanding sexual harassment. Yeah, that should solve matters. Expect opportunistic morons to submit the heat shield for a Glass Lion.
To underscore how White women are prized and prioritized over racial and ethnic groups, it should be noted that no one has volunteered to publish a Green Book for non-White festival attendees.
Oh, and security should’ve kept an eye on all FCB and former DraftFCB visitors.
Sexual harassment at Cannes: a ‘difficult yet essential subject’
By Karen Stacey
There are a lot of inspiring lessons to be learned at Cannes, but we shouldn’t ever let the hectic schedule and fun make us lose sight of what is truly important; taking personal responsibility for our actions, and taking responsibility for those around us.
So, before we all get our delegate badges and start scheduling talks and seminars, it’s vital that we’re all fully educated about this difficult yet essential subject. This isn’t just for visitors and managers on the ground, it goes for senior leaders back home, too.
We know that, sadly, sexual harassment still exists and it can happen anywhere, but the risks rise when alcohol is free-flowing and people are away from home. We also know that what starts as a fun trip can quickly become a nightmare for anyone who experiences sexual harassment.
That’s why this year, Cannes Lions has teamed up with TimeTo and Wildstorm PR to create an invaluable guide to understanding the issues around sexual harassment. Not just in Cannes, but anywhere outside of the office where the drink is flowing and the inhibitions are dropping.
The move is designed to create and foster a supportive environment of respect and accountability, where anyone attending in any capacity feels secure and empowered to enjoy themselves safely and to speak up about sexual harassment, should they need to.
The onus shouldn’t solely be on individuals. People need to trust that employers, event organisers and others with a duty of care are looking out for them. Everyone attending must play a part in addressing this issue – either by stepping in if they see it happening, or stopping if they are perpetrating it.
That is what this guide does so well. It helps navigate the grey areas around sexual harassment by splitting its core messaging into three distinct sections tailored to employers, employees and delegates. Each section offers a specific focus for that audience and provides guidance for before, during, and after the festival.
Examples of guidance include advice before Cannes for senior leaders, managers and HR to establish and make clear policies and procedures; ensuring policies including anti-harassment guidance; outlining what constitutes harassment; the consequences for engaging in such behaviour; and the procedures for reporting incidents.
It also offers helpful advice for all attendees at Cannes, including connecting with others and having a support system for uncomfortable situations. This year, the WACL Empower Café provides a safe space for those affected by sexual harassment, offering guidance on the next steps alongside the guide’s information.
Additionally, it addresses the barriers to reporting sexual harassment. Incidents that occur at the event may not be reported until participants have returned to the UK, highlighting the importance of creating a supportive environment in the moment for any disclosures.
If you notice a friend or colleague behaving in a way that’s offensive or inappropriate, and you feel safe addressing it, speak up. You can let them know that their behaviour isn’t acceptable and point out the impact. Sometimes, people need a new perspective on their actions.
So, when you’re packing your slides or flip-flops and sunscreen or picking up your lanyard, grab the guide as well.
But if you really feel you won’t get anything from it or that you don’t have the time, then maybe just take a few seconds while you’re at passport control or queueing for croissants and think about these things:
• Take the safety of your team seriously
• Lead by example
• Put guardrails in place
• Take your own safety seriously
• Treat people politely and like human beings
• Don’t make people feel awkward – don’t force them to have another drink, listen to what they are saying and read their responses.
It’s basically as simple as treating everyone you meet with respect.
Karen Stacey is the chief executive of Digital Cinema Media, and outgoing vice-president and incoming president of WACL
Although Draft was officially erased from the FCB masthead back in 2014, Chicago still has an Honorary Howard Draft Way—which is in front of the old Draft headquarters (pre-DraftFCB) and blocks away from the current FCB Chicago office.
Meanwhile, the former DraftFCB CEO retired in 2014—yet is currently listed as the Co-Founder & CEO of Vysical, an enterprise whose mission and vision are as bizarre as the website team portraits, which look like comic book illustrations. Delusions of super-heroic grandeur?
Advertising Age reported Anheuser-Busch InBev launched an in-house agency called Draftline. Okay, maybe it’s a nod to draft beer, but the name feels like a Howard Draft enterprise—and even shitty White advertising agency FCB saw fit to shed the Draft label from its masthead.
This Black & Abroad commercial from FCB is offensive, opening with racist sentiments for shock schlock value before launching into a cheery travelogue message.
Maybe FCB should go back—to being Draftfcb.
Campaign spotlighted The Home Office’s “Forced Marriage” campaign by FCB Inferno. Hey, adland shouldn’t be speaking out against forced marriage with a history of consummating unholy unions like VMLY&R, Wunderman Thompson and the mother of all creepy couplings, Draftfcb.
Adweek reported on the latest lunacy involving McCann and the U.S. Army, with a lawsuit being filed against the White advertising agency by a Black media company that accuses McCann of “misleading and defrauding the plaintiff through ad buys made on behalf of the U.S. Army as part of a minority recruitment push.” The plaintiff—Urban One—charges McCann used a struggling Black advertising agency as a “puppet” to make ad buys and qualify for governmental financial incentives tied to utilizing minority vendors. As a result, Urban One insists it is owed over $930k in ad placement costs—along with interest, added costs and legal fees for a grand total of $1.8 million. A McCann spokesperson said the Urban One “claims are baseless” and believes the case will be dismissed. Regardless, this is hardly the first time folks have questioned the professional pranks practices tied to White advertising agencies “partnering” with minority firms on big accounts featuring political and governmental components. See Draftfcb and the U.S. Census as another example. Is it a coincidence that the former Draftfcb and McCann were/are part of the IPG network? And McCann has certainly created controversial kookiness with the U.S. Army, despite obscenely profiting from the account. Hell, don’t be surprised if the White advertising agency leverages this lawsuit to further extend its governmental contact.
Lawsuit Says UM Used ‘Puppet’ Agency for Army’s Minority Recruitment, Then Left Media Unpaid
Urban One claims it is owed $1.8 million in damages
By Patrick Coffee
Urban One, a media company focused on African-American audiences, is suing IPG-owned media agency UM, which is accused of misleading and defrauding the plaintiff through ad buys made on behalf of the U.S. Army as part of a minority recruitment push.
The suit, filed late last week in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, states that UM (named in the filing as Universal McCann Worldwide) “conspired to defraud and mislead” Urban One by way of what the plaintiff calls a “sham buying agent”: Penn, Good & Associates or PGA (now known as Penngood).
Urban One claims UM used Penngood, an African American-owned agency, as a “puppet” to qualify for hundreds of thousands of dollars in government incentives aimed at encouraging contractors to work with minority-owned companies, as defined by the U.S. Small Business Administration.
When Penngood was used to buy U.S. Army ads on Urban One’s TV and radio networks, a credit check reportedly showed that the shop had a “poor credit rating and history,” according to the lawsuit. Urban One also says it felt pressured “at the direction of McCann” to accept the ad buys on credit with assurances that payments would eventually come. The lawsuit cites a 2009 email from a UM svp pledging that Penngood had the “financial capacity and integrity to manage the account.”
Penngood then allegedly failed to pay Urban One $930,268.11 in ad placement costs. All told, Urban One says it is owed $1.8 million in damages, plus interest, assorted costs and attorney’s fees.
UM says claims are ‘baseless’
Urban One describes itself as “the largest distributor of urban content in the country,” and plaintiffs in this suit include its cable network, TV One, and Reach Media, which produces national radio shows by celebrities like D.L. Hughley and Al Sharpton.
This is not the first time the company has pursued legal action over its relationship with the Army’s agency partners, a fact UM points to as a sign that this lawsuit will not go in the plaintiff’s favor.
“A related case brought in 2015 by TV One was summarily dismissed in court earlier this year, and we fully believe this case will be dismissed as well, as the claims are baseless,” a UM spokesperson told Adweek.
A separate suit was indeed filed in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia in August 2015 and dismissed, in part, six months ago.
That filing focused on Penngood and Carol H. Williams Advertising, which partnered with the UM organization for more than 10 years to help plan and execute Army recruiting campaigns targeting African-American consumers. The earlier lawsuit accused those two agencies and their principals of breach of contract while naming UM as a third-party defendant.
The first phase of that case ended on Feb. 9, 2018, when Associate Judge John Campbell of the D.C. court granted a summary judgment in favor of the Williams agency and Carol H. Williams herself, stating that “the Williams defendants are not the party to have recourse against.”
But the judge allowed the claims against Penngood and its co-presidents, Clyde Penn and Garrick Good, to proceed. According to court documents, a separate non-jury trial in that matter is scheduled to begin in December.
“Carol has reviewed the allegations in the complaint TV One has filed in federal court in Maryland,” wrote John J. McNutt, counsel for Carol H. Williams Advertising. “In the complaint, TV One included several allegations against Carol related to her role as a subcontractor to McCann on the U.S. Army advertising contract from 2006 to 2017. Many of these unsupported allegations were previously included in a lawsuit TV One filed against Carol in 2015 in D.C. Superior Court. Carol denies the allegations and is proud of her agency’s many years of work on the U.S. Army contract. In February 2018, the judge in the D.C. case rejected TV One’s allegations against Carol and dismissed all of TV One’s claims against Carol. TV One’s allegations against Carol have been refuted in a court of law.”
After that judgment, Urban One went on to hire the law firm of Morris, Manning and Martin and take action against UM last week. The latest suit mentions Carol H. Williams Advertising several times but does not name the agency as a defendant.
Mounting pressure, overdue bills
At the heart of the new lawsuit is Urban One’s claim that it felt pressured by UM to work with its minority-owned agency partner, Penngood, despite UM allegedly knowing that Penngood had “cash flow problems” that would eventually leave it unable to pay its bills, the suit states.
In January 2009, UM tapped Penngood, according to the lawsuit, despite the small agency emerging from a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing only five months before taking on the business. The lawsuit also states that “Garrick Good, one of the principals of PGA, had been involved in approximately a dozen lawsuits prior to McCann engaging PGA as its ‘buying agent.’”
Urban One continued to run Army ads on its cable and radio platforms while extending credit to Penngood thanks to what it calls “the assurances of and a longstanding business relationship with” UM, which allegedly agreed to be “jointly and severally liable for the advertising buys” while “fraudulently misrepresent[ing] the financial status and capabilities” of its buying partner, the lawsuit states.
Penngood’s financial struggles only grew more pronounced with time. Garrick Good filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in late 2012, but Urban One claims that it did not learn until 2017 that UM had “only performed a cursory check” of the agency’s finances and qualifications.
In addition to the nearly $1 million owed to TV One, the lawsuit also states that radio brand Reach and its local division, Radio One, went through similar experiences after expressing concern over Penngood’s finances several years ago. The agency now allegedly owes these two divisions $375,218.60 and $545,000.00, respectively, for uncompensated ads purchased on credit.
A spokesperson for Urban One’s law firm had not provided additional comment at the time of publication. The listed press contact for Penngood has not responded to a request for comment.
The suit comes less than two weeks after the larger McCann organization filed a bid with the U.S. Government Accountability Office to protest its second elimination from the U.S. Army review in just over a year. That review has now been extended until at least mid-November, and the protest also required the government to extend McCann’s contract beyond its expiration date of Sept. 30 this year.
You can view the lawsuit filing in its entirety [at Adweek].
Today is Human Rights Day, which presents an opportunity to consider human rights as applied to the advertising industry—specifically, pertaining to the concept of diversity. Despite the industry’s efforts to politely position diversity as a business imperative—i.e., diversity is good for business, embrace diversity of thought for better ideas, gain relevance by reflecting the diversity of the marketplace, blah, blah, blah—diversity is a human rights issue. After all, when Madison Avenue came under fire for its dismal dearth of diversity over a decade ago, the charge was led by the New York City Commission on Human Rights.
To commemorate the special day, Human Rights Watch coordinated with 24 landmarks around the world to shine bright blue in a show of solidarity. One participating building is the John Hancock Center, home of FCB Chicago, a member of the IPG empire. In regards to diversity, a peek at FCB Chicago leadership hardly displays a reflection of the marketplace (the 2010 United States Census—advertised by Draftfcb, incidentally—recorded city demographics at 32% Black and 28% Hispanic). Plus, the scenes of the White advertising agency’s office are typically exclusive, with the most prominent Black staffers appearing to be serving in the mount room. Meanwhile, IPG boasts to be recognized for leadership in diversity and inclusion, yet the White holding company also owns a list of offenses to counter the clichéd claims of commitment—including the latest sexual harassment scandal via The Martin Agency.
So take a moment to meditate on human rights and diversity in the advertising industry. It’s well beyond being time to do the right thing—and the human rights thing.
The ad depicted above for a Workfront seminar on “How FCB Conquered Agency Chaos” seems a little odd—especially running while Cannes is about to start—given the White advertising agency’s sad history with lion imagery.
MultiCultClassics is often occupied with real work. As a result, a handful of events occur without the expected blog commentary. This limited series—Delayed WTF—seeks to make belated amends for the absence of malice.
Business Insider published an interview with IPG CEO Michael Roth at Advertising Week Europe, which included the following excerpt:
BI: One of the other big over-arching advertising topics that has certainly had a few high-profile cases this year has been diversity in the industry.IPG has been no exception with what happened at Campbell Ewald (IPG fired the agency’s CEO and a staffer who sent a racist email to colleagues inviting them to take part in a “Ghetto Day”) the ongoing JWT discrimination suit (in which the agency’s now former CEO is accused of making racist and sexist slurs — allegations he denies.) What are holding groups like yourselves doing to ensure there are less of these cases happening?
MR: When I first joined the industry I felt as though diversity and inclusion was not properly reflected in the industry, so 10 years ago we embarked on diversity and inclusion being a core part of the DNA at IPG.
It’s now to a point where our agency heads are held accountable for improvements on diversity and inclusion. When I mean accountable, I mean it affects their bonuses. And we have in fact enforced that to a point where, since we embarked on this program, we have had an improvement of over 50% of manager-level people representative of inclusion and diversity goals over the past 10 years. There is more work to come but I think we’ve made it our DNA.
The other part of it is that we have a zero-tolerance for it. As reflected in the Campbell Ewald [incident.] The second I heard about this, we took action. Not only with respect to the individual who wrote that email, which was offensive, but the individual who was responsible for him, and I took action on them. There was no hesitancy on my part, as opposed to some others.
And, frankly, I was very proud of the fact that I received both internally and externally a lot of comments appreciating how swiftly we acted in that case and our people were very much appreciative of it because they knew it was part of our core.
BI: What is it about the advertising industry that is different to other sectors when it comes to diversity issues?
MR: When I challenge individuals they say there are not enough candidates that are interested in the field, and so on.
Intuitively, that does not make sense. I don’t accept that as an answer when we go over this. We have to do a better job of reaching out and, in essence, selling the career path that we offer. It’s a great career path.
We are in the marketing and communication business. How can we not represent the consumer?
And, by the way, on the gender side, 80% of all purchasing decisions are made by females. So if we don’t have a fair representation just on the female side, we are missing the boat.
But as far as people of color … the same is true. Hispanic is one of the largest growing populations in the world. How can we not be representative of that in terms of the talent? And our clients are demanding this.
So Roth believes a decade of smokescreens has resulted in diversity and inclusion becoming a part of the IPG DNA? Okay, let’s review the progressive proof:
• Four words: Campbell Ewald Ghetto Days.
• IPG behemoth Draftfcb—now FCB—vowed to eliminate the term “diversity and inclusion” from the corporate lexicon by 2014. Now the words are a “core part the DNA at IPG.” Sorry, but IPG is rotten to the core.
• IPG faced a $50 million race-discrimination lawsuit.
• IPG faced an age discrimination lawsuit.
• IPG agencies consistently create culturally clueless crap.
• Deutsch, an IPG White advertising agency, dumped its Diversity Director, who claimed she was told the shop “was no longer going to invest in diversity.”
• IPG brags about dubious diversity awards and its fuzzy commitment and experience with progress.
• IPG publishes gobbledygook claiming to be recognized for leadership in diversity and inclusion—in an industry where everyone admits the dearth of diversity and inclusion is fucked up. It’s like boasting that you’re the smartest Stooge.
And the list goes on.
Adweek and MediaPost also reported on the Mickey D’s and Omnicom McMarriage, which will feature an “Agency of the Future” hand-made for the fast feeder. It’s somewhat ironic that special orders lead to messy customer experiences in McDonald’s restaurants, but the corporation required customized service for its advertising and marketing. Regardless, the PR hype from Omnicom and McDonald’s warrants examination and speculation.
DDB Worldwide President and CEO of North America Wendy Clark gushed the following:
“Exactly 18 weeks ago today, we received a dream brief from one of the most iconic brands in the world … to create ‘the agency of the future.’ The best and the brightest talent across multiple Omnicom agencies came together over the last 4 months to create, operationalize and deliver on that brief. The result is a customized agency built with intelligence at the core, to fuel brilliant creative work, that’s delivered at the speed of the marketplace at an efficient cost. We are thrilled and honored to be selected and excited about immediately creating impact for McDonald’s business.”
McDonald’s USA Chief Marketing Officer Deborah Wahl issued the following gobbledygook:
“Part of building a better McDonald’s means not only making changes to our food and our restaurants, but also how we conduct business, and we’re excited to announce McDonald’s USA has selected Omnicom as our partner to create a new agency which is yet to be named, to build the agency of the future. This new agency will become our partner for all U.S. National Marketing initiatives. In selecting this agency, we will have access to top talent, technology and thinking with digital and data at the core.
They are fast, fluid and flexible and poised to deliver the caliber and volume of storytelling needed to support our business today and into the future. This new model will, over the next few years, create great work at the speed of the marketplace at an efficient cost.
Their creative approach and bold use of channels will elevate our connections with customers in new and innovative ways.”
Okey-doke. This all sounds like a McDonaldland fantasy. Were Ronald McDonald and Mayor McCheese consulted on the grand scheme? The Hamburglar could have offered ideas to enhance speed and cost efficiencies.
Has anyone noticed that “Agency of the Future” is a term typically embraced by professionals who are firmly stuck in the past? From Draftfcb to Enfatico, agencies of the future quickly become history—and never generate sustainable, futuristic innovations. The holding company itself is the root problem. Holding companies are the only enterprises with the resources and scale to fabricate an agency from scratch for a huge client; at the same time, holding companies are comprised of established-yet-outdated firms and executives, so the end product is more of the same. Scooping together distinctive turds ultimately leads to one, big pile of poop. Additionally, integrated marketing—where multiple disciplines and practices work in harmonious collaboration—is still a myth. It becomes a Tower of Babel 2.0, with individuals unable to communicate via a common language—not to mention a common P&L or compensation structure. Hey, here’s a name for the new shop: McBabel.
Wahl babbled about the new agency having “digital and data at the core”—which is a scary thought, as Omnicom does not have strong digital capabilities. Granted, WPP, Publicis Groupe and IPG aren’t much better, but at least they’ve made greater (albeit foolhardy) acquisitions of digital properties over the years.
The big question is, will digital and data be accompanied by diversity? Inventing a new business model without consciously incorporating inclusion is obscene, especially given the history of our industry. Surely the “Agency of the Future”—hatched by the holding company with a Pioneer of Diversity at the helm—will reflect the customers McDonald’s hopes to connect with in newly elevated and innovative ways.
Will McBabel deliver on the dream brief—or will the dream remain deferred, diverted, delegated and denied?
Advertising Age—along with lots of media sources—reported on a Qiaobi detergent commercial from China that is being deemed perhaps the most racist advertisement ever. Um, not really. As the Los Angeles Times pointed out, there’s a long history of racist detergent advertising, much of it coming from the United States. Plus, it’s no ancient Chinese secret that China is on the same planet as, say, Germany, when it comes to cultural cluelessness. It’s actually more offensive when U.S. agencies such as the former Draftfcb consistently churn out culturally clueless crap—despite being part of a holding company boasting leadership in diversity and inclusion. Even from a global perspective, hypocrisy and ignorance trumps ignorance alone.
This Chinese Ad Caused an International Outcry; Now the Brand Is Trying to Erase It
Widely Denounced as Racist, It Disappeared From the Brand’s WeChat Account
By Angela Doland
CNN asked if this Chinese commercial was “the most racist ad ever.” Vibe’s headline was: “There are few words to describe the racism packed into this detergent commercial.”
The ad shows a Chinese woman shoving her black boyfriend into a washing machine. The cycle runs, and when he emerges, he’s been “cleaned”—into a Chinese man.
The commercial is for a detergent brand called Qiaobi, which appears to be a small startup sold mostly through e-commerce. It’s also a shot-for-shot rip-off of an Italian spot uploaded to YouTube 10 years ago. (In the Italian ad, a pasty, hairy white guy is transformed into a buff black guy.)
The international press discovered the Chinese ad Thursday; a day later a search on Google News turned up over 120 articles on it.
The full-length Chinese spot was still viewable early Friday on the brand’s WeChat account, where it was posted weeks ago. One of those posts had said the ad was created with help from a team of directors from popular Hunan TV, a satellite channel. (Hunan TV did not return an email seeking comment.)
By evening, though, the full-length version was gone. All that remained was a post that included a 5-second cut of the end of the ad, without the black actor. That post said it had appeared on big media channels, including Hunan TV, Jiangsu TV and CCTV-7. It was not clear whether Chinese TV giants ran the abridged or longer version, and whether the ads ran locally or more widely.
Ad Age contacted someone representing Qiaobi online. He declined to answer questions, aside from saying that the brand is sold online, on WeChat and in a few shops.
A woman who identified herself as an employee of an agency called Guangdong Today Media had posted about the ad on Weibo, the microblogging service. She took pictures of the spot ostensibly running in a movie theater in the central city of Xi’an, perhaps to show the ad’s reach. Ad Age reached out to ask about the post; she erased it. A version also disappeared from video sites iQiyi and Youku. But copies remained, including on YouTube.
How did this ad get made in the first place? One Shanghai art director at a major international ad agency said Chinese people weren’t as shocked as foreigners, partly because few know anyone who is black. “When we were children we always told jokes about black people turning white, washing their skin and turning white,” he said. “So when we see this ad, it seems very usual.”
On Weibo, some people said Westerners were too “politically correct.” But there was also harsh criticism. A user with the handle Xu Bugouzishu wrote: “If you can’t see any racism in this ad, then congratulations, you are racist!” In a Shanghai café, young office worker Lin Fei watched it and said: “I wonder how those people would feel if a Chinese person was washed into something whiter?”
Adweek reported advertising agencies will be vying for the U.S. Census contract for 2020 work. In 2010, IPG dominated with Draftfcb taking the lead over other below-the-line and minority shops. It’s a safe bet IPG won’t serve up Campbell Ewald as a contender. But will the U.S. Census Bureau hire a White advertising agency to handle the top role? Or will the governmental client seek a partner whose staff reflects the diversity of the country? If so, they may have to wait until 2079 for a qualified agency to emerge.
Agencies Are About to Start Vying for the $415 Million U.S. Census Contract
Deadline looms for 2020 communications work
By Noreen O’Leary
It’s hard to believe another census count is nearly upon us. For agencies wanting to work on the estimated $415 million 2020 census multi-year contract, RFP responses are due Feb. 22.
This time around the Census Bureau is putting more emphasis on digital technology as the government wants to trim costs through greater use of mobile and social.
“The communications industry has changed dramatically since the conduct of the 2010 census, principally due to changes and advances in technology, communications mechanisms and consumer expectations,” according to the RFP. “The Internet, wireless technologies and mobile personal devices have opened new communications channels and media that have empowered consumers with increased connectivity to marketers. The Census Bureau fully intends to harness these emerging technologies and channels as part of the 2020 census integrated communications contract. …The [agency] contractor [selected] shall use an appropriate mix of communications tools with an emphasis on using new technology.”
The final RFP was issued in late January, and agency selections are expected in August. For the 2010 census, Interpublic agencies heavily dominated the team behind the census advertising. Draftfcb, now FCB, was the creative lead, accompanied by agencies GlobalHue, GlobalHue Latino, D’Exposito & Partners, Allied Media, G+G Advertising, IW Group, Plum Agency, Weber Shandwick, Jack Morton, Scholastic, Initiative and Draftfcb Puerto Rico.
The IPA presented its survey results on racial and ethnic diversity in adland, and the low numbers are not surprising. The survey designated non-Whites as BAME (Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic), but didn’t break the figures down further to reveal specific percentages for Blacks, Asians and other ethnic minorities employed by U.K. advertising agencies. As previously noted, the U.K. appears to mirror the U.S. in regards to diversity, including implementing a lot of the same clichéd solutions like minority internships and hand-wringing committees. However, Chief Diversity Officers seem to be unique to America. The IPA also announced an ambitious goal: non-Whites should account for 15% of leadership positions within four years. Hey, Draftfcb couldn’t even deliver on the vow to eliminate the term “diversity and inclusion” from its corporate lexicon within two years. Too bad the IPA has zero authority to mandate anything.
IPA reveals ethnic diversity of adland’s biggest agencies
New BAME figures released today (21st January) by the IPA reveal the ethnic diversity representation within the UK’s biggest agencies*. The IPA has also set an ambitious target for member agencies: by 2020, 15% of people in leadership positions should be from a non-white background. This is in addition to the IPA’s existing commitment to help the industry recruit 25% of new joiners from BAME backgrounds by 2020.
Survey highlights on ethnic diversity representation:
• Employees from a BAME background account for 13.1% of agency staff.
• At 14.5%, media agencies have a slightly higher percentage of BAME employees than creative agencies, at 12.3%.
• 8.0% of those at the top end of the seniority scale (Chair, CEO, MD) are from a non-white background. This is higher in creative agencies at 10.8% than in media agencies at 2.9%. In FTSE 100 companies, 3.5% of senior executives are from a BAME background (source: http://www.thebigidea.co.uk/get-bame-people-boardrooms/).
• The percentage of employees from a non-white background is highest at the junior level. Overall 14.9% of those in an executive/assistant position are from a non-white background, 13.4% of which are in creative agencies and 18.3% are in media agencies.
This second set of figures have been gathered as part of President Tom Knox’s ‘Here for Good’ agenda to reassert and secure for the future advertising’s role as a culturally, social and economically enriching force for good.
View the full set of diversity figures, along with the gender figures here.
In commenting on the figures Tom Knox says: “13.1% BAME representation isn’t going to be good enough in the future and the fact that only 8% of the most senior people in our biggest agencies come from a non-white background concerns me. If we are to realise our goals, we need to do much more to promote the proven business case of diversity in leadership teams which will require us to come together as an industry and re-think our strategies.”
The IPA will support its member agencies in meeting these targets by continuing to promote and develop a wealth of programmes including AdMission, Creative Pioneers and The Great British Diversity Experiment. This Monday (25 January) the IPA is hosting a 44 Club diversity debate ‘Playing the BAME game’.
The first part of the survey, on gender representation in the industry’s biggest agencies, was revealed last week (14 January).
This survey is in addition to the IPA’s annual Agency Census which will be published on the 28th January.
*The IPA’s biggest agencies either have a gross income above £20million or more than 200 employees.
Campaign published a pathetic and patronizing perspective from FCB Global Chief Talent Officer Cynthia Augustine, reprimanding résumé racial profiling and ripping Raven-Symoné. Augustine had the audacity to remark, “Fortunately, most industry leaders are more enlightened than Raven-Symoné. Instead of embracing ignorance and bias, many company leaders actively work against it by creating programs that center around making the unconscious conscious.” Um, which industry leaders is Augustine saluting? They surely can’t be honchos in adland. Additionally, when referencing the recent rants by revolutionary Brad Jakeman and Kat Gordon, Augustine gasped, “What’s happening here? It’s 2015 and we still haven’t solved this.” Augustine also stated, “Most companies, FCB included, have culture and inclusion experts dedicated to adding more diversity to its workforce, ensuring a culture of inclusion and lessening the implicit bias inherent in all of us. After all, bias does indeed live in us all. It is part of what makes us human.” Wow, is that an open admission to the institutionalized discrimination present at White advertising agencies like FCB? Plus, it’s sad for Augustine to display faux dismay that “it’s 2015 and we still haven’t solved this”—seemingly oblivious to former Draftfcb President and CEO Laurence Boschetto’s bold vow that the agency would no longer use the term “diversity and inclusion” by 2014. Augustine should think twice before attacking Raven-Symoné. After all, prorating from a birthdate of December 10, 1985, the former Cosby kid can only have shown bias for less than 30 years. FCB has been unable to shake its cultural cluelessness for at least 140 years.
What’s in a name?
By Cynthia Augustine
Absolutely nothing, says FCB’s global chief talent officer, yet name-based bias happens much too often
Raven-Symoné proudly boasted last month on “The View” that she wouldn’t hire someone with a “ghetto” name. Really? That’s pretty ironic coming from Raven-Symoné. Someone whose first name is uniquely punctuated and uniquely spelled, which — according to the Urban Dictionary — is often the very definition of what’s considered “a ghetto name.”
But who should really care? Because when you think about it, what’s in a name? Absolutely nothing. It’s something someone else decided to call you.
A name doesn’t reveal what a prospective job candidate has done with their life — what they’ve learned and experienced, the skills they’ve developed, the character they have or the obstacles they have possibly overcome. A name doesn’t even reveal a candidate’s ethnicity, no matter what people like Raven-Symoné think. I know a man with the last name Goldstein who was adopted and is actually Chinese. Interviewers are perpetually surprised when they meet him.
Unfortunately, Raven-Symoné is not alone. Many studies conducted between 2003 and today, including those by The University of Chicago and MIT, found that resumes sent out for candidates with African-American-sounding names were 50% less likely to land a job interview than identical resumes sent out under white-sounding names. And, that sorry result is replicated with various other ethnic groups in our country — which does not serve any employer well. Studies like those discussed in Scott Page’s 2008 book The Difference — including one he conducted with Lu Hong of Loyola University Chicago – have consistently shown that diverse teams will outperform and out-innovate homogenous ones.
Fortunately, most industry leaders are more enlightened than Raven-Symoné. Instead of embracing ignorance and bias, many company leaders actively work against it by creating programs that center around making the unconscious conscious.
They have to. It’s a business imperative. PepsiCo.’s Brad Jakeman, president of the global beverage group, just a few weeks ago forcefully told attendees at the Association of National Advertisers conference that he’s tired of talking to a group of white males about his business when it is women who make 85% of the purchase decisions in the category. If the marketing community wants to do more disruptive things, Jakeman said, agencies must bring more diversity to the table, especially women. Kat Gordon’s 3% Conference held last week in New York yet again addressed the dearth of female leadership in the business. What’s happening here? It’s 2015 and we still haven’t solved this.
Forcing ourselves to look at why we haven’t — to ensure we challenge ourselves as much as we challenge a Raven-Symoné — must be a daily occurrence.
Most companies, FCB included, have culture and inclusion experts dedicated to adding more diversity to its workforce, ensuring a culture of inclusion and lessening the implicit bias inherent in all of us. After all, bias does indeed live in us all. It is part of what makes us human. Knowing this, we are committed to raising our collective consciousness with regard to how it may play out in all kinds of business decisions, including hiring. Presently, we are exploring changes to our hiring protocol — like removing names from résumés altogether — so people aren’t influenced by factors that have no relevance at all to whether someone can perform a job. We are also working as an organization to understand, and more effectively and objectively manage, everyday assumptions that live in each of us with regard to criteria we consider when making hiring decisions. We’re not interested in prejudging anyone on irrelevant factors like names, race, gender or educational background that could cause us to miss out on a delightful and completely fabulous job candidate.
If we rely on horribly outdated stereotypes and judgments about people, like whether they have a “ghetto” name, we are perpetuating a deep social injustice and closing our eyes to talent that will move our companies and businesses forward.
Perhaps Hollywood and the media could benefit from the same type of unconscious bias training our industry is undertaking. Maybe we wouldn’t have an Academy Awards season like last year ever again, when all 20 acting nominees were white. Also, doing so may help the Raven-Symonés of the world consider the content of someone’s character first before the number of unique syllables and hyphens in their names.
Cynthia Augustine is global chief talent officer of FCB.
Adweek reported Susan Credle is abandoning her position of CCO at Leo Burnett to assume the role of Global CCO at FCB. This is the equivalent of moving from a Porta Potty to an outhouse. It’s also another example of White women having no problem advancing in the advertising industry—and Credle has already acknowledged the business is not tough for a woman. Yep, faux diversity is thriving on Madison Avenue. Interestingly enough, the culturally clueless Credle swaps the White agency that cried No.2.66 for the White agency that vowed it would stop using the term “diversity and inclusion” by 2014. To date, both shops continue to perpetuate exclusivity like there’s no tomorrow.
Susan Credle Will Leave Leo Burnett to Help Ignite Creativity at FCB
The next global CCO is known for work on M&M’s, Allstate
By Noreen O’Leary
Susan Credle is the new global chief creative officer at FCB, replacing Jonathan Harries, who’s held the post since 2006 and will now become chairman. The changes take effect on January 1.
Credle will relocate to New York from Chicago, where she’s been CCO at Leo Burnett USA.
After meeting Credle during the interview process, FCB worldwide chief Carter Murray said he thought she was the “obvious candidate” to be his global creative partner. The CCO search began a year ago.
“There was immediate chemistry with Susan. She is very talented and has a strong point of view on business and creativity and has our values and character,” said Murray.
Credle joined the Publicis Groupe agency in 2009, and during her time there, is credited with new-business wins like Marshall’s, Kraft, Esurance, Sprint and Cincinnati-based regional bank Fifth Third. Credle is also associated with the agency’s “Mayhem” campaign for Allstate, and the anti-bullying initiative “Mean Stinks” for Procter & Gamble’s Secret.
“Along with [global CCO] Mark Tutssel, Susan has led the creative renaissance at Leo Burnett,” Murray added.
The former copywriter started her career at BBDO New York after graduating from The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 1985. She moved up the ranks during her 24-year career at BBDO before ultimately being appointed evp and ecd. At BBDO, Credle reinvented M&M’s iconic characters and was involved in award-winning work for clients such as Bank of America, FedEx, Gillette, Lowe’s, PepsiCo, Pizza Hut and Visa.
Credle said she was sold on Murray’s offer to join him in building a creative culture at FCB. She added that the essential elements to do that are people, place and purpose.
“It’s in the DNA of FCB,” she said. “I love legacy brands—and that includes agencies—so my feeling is, ‘Let’s go claim that.’ It’s like at Leo Burnett where we went to find the soul of the company and light it up.”
New York Post columnist John Crudele published a perspective about the U.S. Census booking Dick Gregory for a Black History Month event. After certain workers took offense to Gregory’s routine, the U.S. Census apologized by stating, “We understand [Gregory’s] comments offended some members of the audience. Gregory’s statement and opinions were his own and do not reflect the Census Bureau’s commitment to an inclusive workplace environment free from discrimination and harassment. … We make every effort to ensure that our external speakers represent diverse viewpoints while also respecting the audience.” Okay, but the bigger U.S. Census joke—which turned out to be offensively ignorant—involved letting Draftfcb lead a multicultural campaign in 2007.
Census Bureau paid controversial Dick Gregory to address workers
By John Crudele
The Census Bureau paid comedian Dick Gregory between $15,000 and $20,000, plus expenses, to address workers at its headquarters in February — and now Census regrets it.
The performer and civil rights activist, who is known to use raw language and racial terms that many find objectionable, spoke during Black History Month. But apparently he offended enough of the workers that Census is revising its policy on outside speakers.
The Gregory situation, which I just found out about last week, is a good example of why there needs to be more oversight over how taxpayer money is spent.
First, let’s listen to Census grovel.
“We understand [Gregory’s] comments offended some members of the audience,” Census said in a statement to me that appears to have been sent to irate workers. “Gregory’s statement and opinions were his own and do not reflect the Census Bureau’s commitment to an inclusive workplace environment free from discrimination and harassment.”
Yeah, yeah, sure. Gregory’s spiel is well known. This wasn’t Jerry Seinfeld they were hiring.
“We make every effort to ensure that our external speakers represent diverse viewpoints while also respecting the audience,” it continued.
Sure, diverse viewpoints!
“We will seek to continue to meet this standard in the future and are thoroughly reviewing our procedures for selecting speakers to ensure their views are appropriate for a federal workplace,” the statement said.
How about this? Don’t have speakers! Don’t spend money unnecessarily! Let your workers go to a comedy club for their entertainment like the rest of us do.
Census didn’t get back to me when I asked how much Gregory was paid. But I learned the range of his fee from Celebrity Talent Promotions, which handles his bookings. Hopefully, Census got a discount.
There is no YouTube video of Gregory’s speech that I could find. But included in Gregory’s nuggets of wisdom was apparently criticism of the “crackers” in Census management for not showing up for the talk.
In case you are wondering, “crackers” have nothing to do with Nabisco.
