This morning I had to do something I don't ordinarily do.
I had to judge an Awards Show.
An Awards Show for the financial services industry.
I probably looked at 200 pieces of work.
Three, I think, were good.
One was outstanding.
But here's the thing.
A large percentage should never have been entered.
Not because they sucked or anything like that.
But because, I think, that not every category people can conceive is actually awardable.
Today for instance I saw entries that were essentially powerpoint presentations.
Posters at events that say "Welcome."
Things of that magnitude.
When things so small get awards it diminishes and and undercuts the meaning of awards for work that is really deserving.
Can't we just be satisfied that we've done a decent job and leave it at that?
as we all know, if 95% of all the work that has no chance of winning awards had never been entered there would be no awards shows.
ReplyDeleteThere would be no money in awards shows.
What always surprises me when judging awards is that maybe as much as 80% of the entries have no chance at all.
Which the CD's at those agencies should know beforehand. If not else by judging by the work that won the years before. It's so obvious isn;t it?
I don't often get involved in doing work that has a chance to win awards. And I bloody know it. So I don't sent it in. Wasting money,
But a lot of the work that I've done is hard working, strong, functional work. Aimed at audiences you don't normally find among awards judges.
Your method of eхplaining thе ωhole thing in this ρost is actually nice,
ReplyDeleteаll be able tо wіthout dіfficultу know it, Thanks a
lot.
Review my weblog: payday loans no credit check
Wthe Award Show circuit is a business. Let's remember that.
ReplyDeleteOnly a handful of te big ones actually count.
The rest, nada.