17455: FYI WPP Q1 WTF (Cont’d).

 

MediaPost spotlighted additional details on WPP Q1 earnings, revealing WPP Media delivered the worst decline for the single White operating company.

 

This is extra bad news given pseudo thought leaders and analysts speculate WPP CEO Cindy Rose is restructuring the flaming dumpster to become a media-first enterprise.

 

Based on the earnings report, WPP is now a media-worst enterprise.  

 

WPP Media Delivers Worst Q1 Decline, ‘Enterprise Solutions’ Seen Most Promising

 

By Joe Mandese

 

Media was the biggest drag on revenue during WPP’s first quarter, the “unholding” company disclosed in its earnings release this morning.

 

WPP Media, which accounts for the greatest share of company revenue (41%, see chart below), saw its revenue decline 8.5% in the first quarter -- nearly two points greater than WPP’s overall decline and markedly greater than its other reported divisions, including creative services, public relations and specialist agencies.

 

While WPP did not disclose the explicit performance of a newer category of services – “enterprise solutions,” which now accounts for 13% of total revenue -- it was cited as a potential area of higher revenue growth.

 

The earnings report called out a recent enterprise solutions deal with Adobe as an example, but did not explicitly disclose the nature of the services or the revenue model.

 

17454: FYI WPP Q1 WTF.

 

MediaPost spotlighted the WPP Q1 earnings call, where the White holding company—er, single White operating company—reported revenue declines in line with expectations.

 

Clearly, expectations are low—albeit probably realistic.

 

WPP CEO Cindy Rose dodged the call, contrasting the attendance practice established by predecessors Mark Read and Sir Martin Sorrell.

 

MediaPost stated, “Rose will participate in the mid- and full-year earning calls, following the practice of most other UK and European public companies.”

 

Okay, except WPP is unlike most other UK and European public companies, at least in terms of experiencing dire financial straits. One would think Rose might feel obligated to appear at every earnings call to provide status reports on Eviscerate28.

 

Sadly, no one seems concerned about employees’ expectations.

 

WPP Reports Q1 Dip, In Line With Expectations

 

By Steve McClellan

 

WPP reported first quarter net revenues of 2.26 billion GBP ($3.05 billion), down 6.7% on an organic basis (excluding currency and M&A impact), in line with previous guidance from the company.  

 

The firm reiterated that it expects a first half organic revenue decline in the mid-to-high single digits for the first half of 2026 “with an improving trajectory in the second half.” The firm also stated that full-year pre-tax profit margin is expected to be in the 12% to 13% range.  

 

CEO Cindy Rose stated that the company’s latest turnaround plan unveiled in February  is “resonating with clients and driving strong new business. While it is only a few months since we unveiled our Elevate28 strategy, I am encouraged by this momentum which validates the ‘Stabilization’ phase of the plan and our path to growth.” 

 

Rose was not on the company’s earnings call, which is a departure from past practice during both the Mark Read and Martin Sorrell eras. It’s understood going forward that Rose will participate in the mid- and full-year earning calls, following the practice of most other UK and European public companies.  

 

Major first quarter wins included being named Estée Lauder’s first-ever global media partner, and media assignment wins for Wendy’s, SC Johnson and Norwegian Cruise Lines in the US. 

 

“Elevate28” is designed to stabilize the business this year, build momentum in 2027 and deliver sustained growth from 2028 and beyond.  

 

The company said it would cut costs by 500 million GBP a year to help achieve the plan. That cost saving is expected to be fully achieved by 2028. 

 

By business segment revenue, global integrated agencies were collectively down 7.4%, which the company attributed largely to prior year client losses. There was a sequential improvement from the 10%+ dip seen in Q4. PR was down 2.6% and specialist agencies were down 2.3%. 

 

By region, North America declined 7.8% due largely to prior year client losses at WPP Media and spending cuts at Ogilvy and AKQA.  

 

The UK declined 6.6%, Western Continental Europe saw a 4.7% shortfall, and the rest of the world combined was off 6.9%, driven by Asia Pacific (-8.2%). India grew 1.0% on new business wins, offset by China declines (-12.2%) on continued spending pressures and client losses. Middle East & Africa declined 11.1% on cuts to client spending caused by geopolitical strife in the Middle East.  

 

Latin America was down 3.4% and Central & Eastern Europe declined less than 1%.

17453: How Banning Junk Food TV Advertising Might Junk Adland.

 

MediaPost reported U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. would support banning junk food TV advertising.

 

The devastating impact such a move would deliver to Adland immediately elevates Kennedy to White Man Of The Year contender.

 

RFK Jr. Supports Potential Ban On Junk Food TV Ads

 

By Tanya Gazdik

 

U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. says he would support a ban on junk food TV ads.

 

“Speaking at a Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee hearing, ranking member Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said President Donald Trump’s nominee for surgeon general, Casey Means, had recently told the panel she supports banning junk food ads on TV,” according to CNBC. “When asked whether he agrees with a ban, Kennedy said, ‘I would support that.’ But Kennedy also appeared to imply that he would want the effort to be voluntary for food companies.”

 

The food and restaurant industry spends about $14 billion annually for advertising in the U.S., according to an often-cited 2017 analysis of Nielsen data by the University of Connecticut's Rudd Center for Food Policy and Health. Of this, over 80% promoted fast food, sugary drinks, candy, and unhealthy snacks.

 

“The Trump administration is looking into possible limits on junk food ads for children, according to a strategy report released by the Make America Healthy Again Commission last year,” according to Seeking Alpha. 

 

The HHS and Federal Trade Commission, along with other relevant agencies, will explore the development of potential industry guidelines to limit the direct marketing of certain unhealthy foods to children, including by evaluating the use of misleading claims and imagery, according to the report.

 

Kennedy has been pushing food makers to remove petroleum-based dyes by the end of 2026. He also has actively pushed to restrict the types of foods allowed under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to exclude items considered unhealthy, such as soda and candy. 

 

Last month, Kennedy chose Florida to roll out a new health initiative aimed at overhauling hospital food.

 

“Having revamped the food pyramid and pushed state food assistance programs to restrict soda and other processed foods, Kennedy has turned his sights on U.S. hospitals, arguing that providing healthy food to patients can aid healing and reduce readmissions,” according to Politico. “And the announcement taking place in Florida is another signal of the state’s continued alignment with MAHA movement priorities being heralded by the Trump administration.”

 

The U.S. is not the only country aiming to legislate wellness. 

 

The U.K. Parliament just yesterday approved a law that bans the supply or sale of tobacco products to anyone born in 2009 or after, permanently.

 

“The bill applies to people currently 17 years old or younger and aims to keep them from ever picking up the habit in their lifetime,” according to The New York Times. “The proposal is expected to soon go into law after the final formality of approval by King Charles III.”

17452: Taking The Air Out Of Nike…?

Glossy reported how certain shoe brands sought to capitalize on the Nike Boston Marathon stumble.

 

Not convinced leveraging a competitor’s cultural cluelessness creates a strong strategic platform.

 

A more appropriate response might be walking the high road. Or just walking away.

 

Nike’s marathon billboard backlash inspires new Asics and Ecco campaigns

 

By Zofia Zwieglinska

 

Following Nike’s Boston Marathon backlash, competitors jumped on the opportunity to define “movement” on their own terms, beyond the marathon run.

 

In the days leading up to Monday’s Boston Marathon, Nike installed a series of signs near its Newbury Street store, including one that read, “Runners welcome, walkers tolerated.” The message drew immediate criticism online, with runners calling out the wording as exclusionary, particularly given how common it is for participants at all levels to walk parts of a marathon.

 

On April 17, Nike removed the sign. In a statement released the same day, the company said, “We want more people to feel welcome in running—no matter their pace, experience, or the distance. During race week in Boston, we put up a series of signs to encourage runners. One of them missed the mark. We took it down, and we’ll use this moment to do better and continue showing up for all runners.”

 

The response from competitors in the running space was swift. Japanese running shoe brand Asics installed its own messaging in Boston over race weekend, with a billboard reading, “Runners. Walkers. All Welcome,” alongside the line, “Move your body, move your mind.” The phrasing echoed the brand’s broader campaign, which emphasizes the mental benefits of movement alongside physical performance, but its timing positioned it as a direct counterpoint to Nike’s misstep.

 

Danish shoe brand Ecco, meanwhile, used the moment to introduce a longer-term change in how it talks about movement.

 

Over the marathon weekend, in Boston, the brand launched “Walk Your Walk,” a global campaign centered on everyday movement, rather than performance sport. The campaign is anchored by the line, “No run intended. Walk your walk,” and positions walking as a primary use case rather than a secondary one.

 

Ecco’s global CMO, Ezra Martin, said the timing was not coincidental, though the brand’s aim was not to directly criticize Nike’s billboard.

 

“We always pay attention to what’s happening in culture,” Martin told Glossy. “We all saw what other brands were doing and saying in the space. Walking became sort of the centerpiece of the cultural lexicon in that moment in time, which made it a natural platform for us to have a point of view.”

 

Walking has become more culturally relevant in recent years, driven in part by trends like “hot girl walks,” coined on TikTok during the pandemic, and the wider move away from high-intensity workout culture and looksmaxing. At the same time, analysts including Circana have pointed to growing demand for comfort-led, everyday footwear, as shoppers look for products that fit into daily routines and a softer approach to fitness rather than just peak performance moments. 

 

“Walking is becoming a symbol of accessible well-being,” Martin said, pointing to its physical, mental and social benefits. According to the National Library of Medicine, walking 9,000–10,000 steps a day can cut mortality risk by about 40% and cardiovascular disease by more than 20%, while even 10–30 minutes of brisk walking daily supports heart health, mental well-being and longevity. “Consumers are prioritizing longevity and quality of life,” said Martin.

 

The campaign also marks a new approach to brand building for Ecco.

 

“This marks a very purposeful movement into more of a brand-led conversation,” Martin said. “We want to build upper-funnel brand equity and not just do very product-led storytelling.”

 

Early signals suggest the message is resonating. “We saw record numbers of traffic hitting our site,” Martin said. “It showed that people were going beyond just liking something. They were sharing it, saving it, visiting the website and making a purchase.” The launch post has generated more than 123,000 likes on social, according to the brand, and driven a surge in engagement. The brand has 658,000 followers on Instagram.

 

On the ground in Boston, Ecco paired the campaign with light-touch activations, including product-trial moments. 

 

“People really connected with the simplicity and inclusivity of the message,” Martin said. “The magic in our shoes is that the technology is invisible — we don’t have visible airbags or exaggerated outsoles like a Hoka, where you look at the shoe and immediately think it’s comfortable. Ours looks like a well-designed shoe, so the best way to understand it is to actually try it on.” 

17451: Nike Just Blew It (Cont’d).

Advertising Age published a perspective on the Nike Boston Marathon stumble, presented by a disability community advocate.

 

The viewpoint inadvertently underscores that confronting cultural cluelessness in Adland is a never-ending marathon.

 

How Nike’s Boston Marathon ad exposed a gap in disability fluency

 

By Kelsey Lindell

 

Last week, a Nike window a few blocks from the Boston Marathon finish line read “Runners welcome. Walkers tolerated.” The ad got pushback from the disability community and running community at large. The brand forgot that it’s completely normal to walk parts of the course, whether that is due to disability, or the fact that 26.2 miles is a very long run.

 

The company pulled the ad, saying it “missed the mark,” and replaced it with “Boston will always remind you, movement is what matters.” To Nike’s credit, the cleanup was fast and it’s a company that has invested heavily in accessibility in terms of product. But investing in product accessibility didn’t save the brand from a public snafu, or prevent competitors from taking ground with the community that Nike had been building towards for decades.

 

I wish Nike had considered our “Purple Framework,” which asks people to think about disability inclusion as the color purple: red represents accessibility and blue represents acceptance. Many brands, like Nike, invest heavily in adapting the product, or making sure that experiences are physically accessible. Far fewer invest in understanding disability culture.

 

Take, for example, NBCUniversal: In 2024, it launched new accessibility features around the same time Shane Gillis hosted “Saturday Night Live.” He used the R word multiple times in his opening monologue. You can create the most accessible products in the world, but if you don’t understand and care about our community, you’ll lose your investment fast. That’s precisely what happened with Nike.

 

While I’m always cheering for more disabled people to be in full-time creative roles, that’s not enough to solve this. A sign like “Walkers tolerated” doesn’t come from one person. It passes through: a brief, copywriter, strategist, designer, account lead, creative director and client review.

 

Dozens of people touched this before it hit the window, but none flagged it.

 

The creative community needs to treat disability fluency as the baseline of creative competency, because it is. Just like I need to understand nuances and best practices so I don’t accidentally create something full of microaggressions around race or gender, the creative community needs to understand the nuances and culture of disability.

 

Here’s what baseline fluency would have caught on the Nike sign:

 

How Boston Marathon history shapes disability inclusion

 

The sign went up about a week before Marathon Monday in a city where, in 2013, a bomb at the finish line produced a generation of amputee runners. Fifty years prior, Bob Hall cajoled the Boston Marathon’s race director into letting him onto the start line and the Boston Athletic Association formalized the wheelchair division in 1977. Boston became the first World Marathon Major to institutionalize wheelchair racing, and more than 1,900 wheelchair athletes have competed there since.

 

The Boston Marathon has an entire inclusive ecosystem: the Wheelchair Division with its own qualifying standards and prize money, a Para Athletics Division, an Adaptive Program for Runners, a Handcycle Program and Duo Teams. Runners with vision impairments race with up to two guide runners. Para athletes get their own staging areas, their own bus load-ins, their own classification processes.

 

Why ad copy language matters for disability culture

 

“Tolerated” isn’t a neutral word in the disability community. It’s the word that sits at the top of every policy fight about disabled people’s right to exist in public space for the last fifty years. Using it casually in ad copy is the disability equivalent of using “blind spot” casually in a DEI conversation. It lands hard because it has history.

 

Nike wanted competitive pride, but the line they wrote wasn’t rooted in celebration of athletic excellence; it was rooted in exclusion. Meanwhile, Nike is in the middle of a running comeback. The brand has been losing ground in specialty running to Brooks, Hoka, On, New Balance, Asics and Saucony. The “Walkers tolerated” sign didn’t just alienate disabled runners, but anyone beginning to see themselves as an athlete. Those are exactly the customers Nike is trying to win back.

 

How Nike’s competitors responded to the disability backlash

 

The brands that moved fastest are also the brands gaining on Nike in specialty. Brands that can read the room on disability and inclusive language now have a real window for cheap, fast, high-resonance moves. Brands that can’t are going to be left in the dust.

 

Within 72 hours of Nike’s sign going viral, five competitors moved. Asics put up a billboard 1 mile from the finish line outside Fenway Park, reading “Runners. Walkers. All welcome,” Ecco went bigger—billboards across Boston reading “No run intended. Walk your walk,” plus a giveaway of 100 pairs of sneakers to everyday walkers and marathon spectators, and on-route cheering stations for “runners and walkers alike with equal enthusiasm.”

 

Altra posted on Instagram: “Run. Walk. Crawl. Go where you’re celebrated. Not where you’re tolerated. Good luck to everyone running (or walking) Boston on Monday.” Hoka kept it simple: “No matter what pace, we fly together.” Adidas—the title sponsor of the Boston Marathon, whose spotlight Nike was trying to steal with this guerrilla activation, commented directly on adaptive runner Robyn Michaud’s Instagram post with a single line: “Every pace has a pace.” Five competitors in three days, and four of them don’t even have adaptive product lines. Nike does.

 

Why brands must treat disability inclusion as a cultural imperative

 

This is the cleanest case for our Purple Framework I’ve seen: you can invest millions into accessible products and still lose the disability community overnight if your cultural understanding hasn’t kept pace.

 

The fix isn’t complicated: give your teams enough time and cultural grounding to actually care about what they’re making. I absolutely do not think that any of the creatives on this project sought out to alienate 25% of the population with $13 trillion in spending. Culture moves fast. While we encourage everyone to co-create with the community, the way we prevent cultural faux pas while working at lightning speed is by giving everyone the same frameworks to self-correct.

 

None of this is rocket science. The frameworks needed to audit are learnable in a day, and we often deliver it to teams in microdosed portions. It’s the same cultural fluency a good creative has always been expected to develop. Disability is only represented in 1% of ads, so while it’s understandable that this is a growth area for most creatives, it begs the question: what are brands doing to fix it?

 

Strategic inclusion is not just a matter of “being a good person.” The people who worked on this ad are likely all wonderful, kind people who would never want to hurt people with disabilities. But those of us who create content create culture—and we need to treat disability as more than a compliance checkpoint and embrace it for the multifaceted, multidimensional community that it is.

 

Kelsey Lindell is the founder + CEO of Misfit Media, a disability culture consultancy that helps the world’s greatest storytellers and creative teams get strategic inclusion right.

17450: Campaign Wins Best DEI Coverage Of Worst DEI Industry…?

 

Campaign announced its US publication won Best DEI Coverage at the 72nd annual Jesse H. Neal Awards.

 

Okay, but covering DEIBA+ in Adland—as a trade publication—involves presenting content to a disinterested, indifferent, and/or insular audience.

 

Campaign US wins Best DEI Coverage at 2026 Neal Awards

 

The prestigious editorial award marks a first for the US business publication.

 

By Campaign Staff

 

Campaign US won a top honor at the 72nd annual Jesse H. Neal Awards in New York City on Tuesday.

 

The U.S. advertising publication received the award for Best DEI Coverage in the category of brand revenue of less than $3 million. The Jesse H. Neal Awards are deemed the most prestigious editorial honors in the field of specialized journalism, often referred to as “Pulitzers of B2B journalism.” Named after Jesse H. Neal, the first managing director of American Business Media, the Neal Awards were established in 1955 to recognize and reward editorial excellence in business media. 

 

“We are proud to receive this award and be recognized for our efforts to ensure our editorial coverage is a reflection of today’s world,” states Luz Corona, editor of Campaign US. “As the only all-women reporting team in the advertising industry, Campaign US organically brings forth diverse expertise and lived experiences in its reporting. We are united in our commitment to tell the stories of the creatives behind breakthrough work and hold the industry accountable in important areas such as diversity and equity, workplace policies and issues and cultural blunders.”

 

Campaign US takes a sharp focus on the U.S. advertising market, backed by the power of a global network of journalists and leading industry brands. Its mission is simple yet critical: In a volatile, uncertain and divided world, Campaign makes sense of the things that matter in the advertising industry and “help our people solve problems, be inspired and be better informed.” This mission reflects the larger commitment to impact and sustainability shared by its parent company, Haymarket Media Group, which recently earned B Corp certification.

 

Examples of Campaign coverage include:

 

The Cannes Lions inclusivity report: Who’s really being seen — and who’s still missing?

Data journalist Cecilia Garzella examines 50+ winning/shortlisted U.S. ad campaigns from the 2025 Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity, based on SeeMe Index's responsible AI analysis.

 

PSAs from CoorDown, Ad Council and AARP sound off on ‘Pretirement’ and World Down Syndrome Day

Senior reporter Leslie Blount highlights Public Service Announcements addressing "Pretirement" (relevant to Black women’s low retirement savings) and World Down Syndrome Day, also covering organizations promoting accessibility, a compelling issue amid political cuts to disability benefits.

 

6 Black executives sound off on the obstacles and opportunities ahead

Blount gauges how top Black ad execs have managed day-to-day business in the face of the Trump administration’s strident anti-diversity rhetoric in early 2025.

 

The Best DEI Coverage award was presented to the Campaign US staff, which includes: Luz Corona, editor of Campaign US; Leslie Blount, senior reporter; Cecilia Garzella, data journalist; Julia Walker, reporter; Emma Thumann, reporter.

 

Campaign’s sister publications in the Haymarket Media portfolio also brought home Neal Awards. MM+M was awarded Best Single Issue of a Tabloid/Newspaper/Magazine for a brand with revenue between $3 million and $7 million for its 2025 Agency 100 issue. PRWeek won Best Podcast for a brand with revenue between $3 million and $7 million helmed by senior producer of podcasts Bill Fitzpatrick.

17449: Putting The Anal In Analyst.

Advertising Age presented content titled, “3 misconceptions fueling pessimism about ad agencies—and signals that they’re overblown.”

 

Okay, except the article is based on a report published by an advisory and consulting firm’s industry analyst whose CV includes stints as a senior executive at IPG and WPP.

 

Given that IPG was erased and WPP is a flaming dumpster, what is the value of perspectives from a White man who toiled at such places?

 

In Adland, those who can, do; those who can’t, analyze for consultancies.

 

3 misconceptions fueling pessimism about ad agencies—and signals that they’re overblown

 

By Ewan Larkin

 

Ad agencies have taken a beating in perception, battered by AI anxiety, restructurings and a string of layoffs. In a report published today, Brian Wieser, principal at advisory and consulting firm Madison and Wall, argues the sector is being misread.

 

The prevailing narrative that automation, in-housing and client cutbacks are slowly hollowing out the agency business is largely a story about a handful of struggling public companies, not the industry as a whole, Wieser said. His analysis, which draws on a new data set covering 17 publicly traded agency groups and hundreds of independent, privately held companies, claims that the industry is more profitable and durable than many believe.

 

Ad Age dives into Wieser’s key takeaways below.

 

The agency sector is growing, just not like it used to

 

The struggles of agency holding companies including WPP and Dentsu have shaped what Wieser sees as a misinterpretation of the U.S. industry’s health. Revenue at private independents—which account for roughly two-thirds of the U.S. agency business—grew about 2% in 2025, compared to just 0.5% growth across all publicly listed agencies, Wieser wrote.

 

“Many people conflate public companies as being the industry,” Wieser said in an interview.

 

Excluding political agencies, which skew industry data in election years, Wieser forecasts roughly 2% revenue growth annually through 2030, compared to approximately 1.5% growth in 2025. While that’s up, it’s also a deceleration from the 4% to 6% growth the industry enjoyed in the pre-pandemic years, which Wieser acknowledges is unlikely to return.

 

AI isn’t gutting the agency business, at least not yet

 

The inexorable rise of generative AI has prompted long-term concerns about ad agencies, putting pressure on the shares of the industry’s biggest players. Agency holding companies have attempted to quell the damage: Stagwell ramped up its share buyback program to signal confidence in its growth, while Publicis Groupe Chairman and CEO Arthur Sadoun drew a sharp distinction between his company and rivals, which he accused of squeezing margins to please Wall Street.

 

Wieser sees the anxiety around AI as overblown, at least in the short term. A Madison and Wall report published in March, based on direct conversations with senior technology and strategy leadership at most of the largest agency groups, found that clients are not cutting budgets in response to AI, but asking for more. “The tools are real. The investment is real. The financial impact, so far, is not,” Wieser wrote in the March report.

 

That agencies’ financial trajectories have arguably improved in 2026 rather than worsened, Wieser added in today’s report, only amplifies that point. There may come a time when AI’s financial impact on agencies becomes material, “but we’re still a long way away from that world,” he added. For now, he argued, agencies have adapted, deploying AI tools while leaning on what machines cannot yet replicate, the human judgment and knowledge required to sell ideas.

 

In-housing isn’t displacing agencies

 

Marketers have been building in-house agencies for decades; the share with internal capabilities nearly doubled from 42% to 82% between 2008 and 2023, according to the Association of National Advertisers.

 

Wieser, however, argues that the ANA’s figure obscures what’s actually happening: his own analysis of the trade group’s data suggests those marketers account for only around 10% of total agency-related work, despite years of in-housing efforts. “Lost revenues from in-sourcing have likely been offset by growing revenue streams from emerging marketers who historically performed all marketing in-house (as most companies do from their earliest stages),” he wrote.