At The New York Times Magazine, Kwame Anthony Appiah presented provocative perspectives on privilege pertaining to interns. There are implications and considerations for Adland, where most White advertising agencies’ internships are rife with privilege, politics, performative PR, and prejudice—from nepotism to cronyism to sexism to school favoritism.
More About Advertising reported on charges of sexist behavior leveled against male advertising professionals behind entries for a Glass Lion trophy, exposing another blatant example of hypocrisy in Adland.
Expect the #timeTo guide to understanding sexual harassment to receive expanded updates for the next Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity.
Gee, it all feels as outrageous as White advertising agencies winning awards for campaigns promoting DEIBA+ perspectives.
Jane Austin in Cannes: Cindy Gallop calls out sexist behaviour at Cannes
By Jane Austin
Some male advertising professionals behind entries for the Glass Lion for Change category this year are definitely not practicing what they preach in their creative work.
Cindy Gallop, president of the Glass Lions jury, said on that several individuals who presented their work to the jury this week exhibited sexist behaviour while doing so and jury had contacted those entrants later to express their displeasure.
This included “the man talking over the woman, the man physically blocking the woman with his body while presenting, using the woman as a prop,” said Gallop.
As Gallop pointed out, this is indicative of ongoing sexism in the industry. It also further highlights the hypocrisy of this industry. The messaging about DE&I, and issues like sexism, harassment, bullying and gender discrimination, is often just that – messaging. Behind all the posturing about change, the same old sexist rules still apply.
Thankfully, more awareness has been raised at Cannes this year about the sexist behaviour and harassment that has long been a feature of the festival. We’re seeing some action being taken this year, with the TimeTo initiative to tackle sexual harassment in advertising, partnering with Cannes Lions to produce new anti-harassment guidance.
In addition, women have stronger voices than ever at Cannes, with the likes of the Female Quotient Equality Lounge and MadWomen hosting thought-provoking discussions. Though the focus on girly culture that’s sometimes a feature of female-focused events at Cannes (the makeovers, the pink cocktails etc) can jar a bit with the seriousness of the issue. But hey, you can be serious about feminism and still want to look good.
Gallop and the Glass jury have done what everyone in this industry should be doing: calling out sexist behaviour for what it is and demonstrating that it will not be tolerated. If behaviour like this goes unchecked in any work environment, DE&I initiatives don’t amount to much more than processes and empty promises.
You can create campaigns that celebrate women all you like, but if your behaviour doesn’t change, nothing will. It’s not just a matter of talking about diversity, it’s about behaving like a human being who respects others and shows some human decency. In the rush to hustle in Cannes, some are forgetting that entirely.
This JFK Presidential Library and Museum campaign is described as follows:
Service and Sacrifice offers personal glimpses of a few of the Americans who served in World War II, including members of the Kennedy family and the untold stories of historically marginalized communities, including people of color and women, and how they relate to today.
Can’t help but wonder how the historically marginalized fare at the White advertising agency behind the campaign.
Campaign published a lengthy report on NDAs—non-disclosure agreements—which have allegedly been used by White advertising agencies to hush victims of abuse and harassment from bullying, sexism, and racism. Although most victims, especially victims of racism, don’t get an NDA—they get NADA.
Harassment in adland: agencies hesitate in stamping out gagging clauses
By Gurjit Degun
When the “Make NDAs Fair” pledge launched in May 2022, it was a rallying cry to the industry to do better. For too long non-disclosure agreements have been used by corporations to hush victims of abuse, be it around sexual harassment, bullying, racism or sexism.
The pledge was led by a group of industry volunteers – including Jo Wallace, global executive creative director at MediaMonks; Shilpen Savani, a partner at law firm Gunnercooke; and Jerry Daykin, head of global media at Beam Suntory and diversity ambassador at World Federation of Advertisers – and backed by trade associations. It asked businesses to adopt fairer policies when it came to NDAs.
These included absolute freedom to report workplace abuse and sexual harassment; a company paying compensation to settle a workplace abuse and/or sexual harassment claim should have no link to a complainant’s silence; protection of reputation should apply to the employer only, so no blanket protection for individuals; and workers should be independently advised before accepting an NDA.
So a year on, how much has actually changed? Sharon Lloyd Barnes, commercial director and inclusion lead at the Advertising Association (which was one of the original backers of the campaign), believes that the dial is turning. She points to the All In census findings.
In 2022 1% of women and 1% of men (out of 18,500 people) who responded to the survey said that they had experienced sexual harassment in the workplace; this is compared with 3% of women and 2% of men (16,000 replied to the survey) in 2021.
“We are sure this is down to industry engagement in TimeTo [the industry initiative that offers training to tackle sexual harassment in adland] and also an increase in self-policing and allyship that we now see in the ad industry workplace,” she says.
Savani believes that the “Make NDAs Fair” pledge has had an impact. “There’s a far greater awareness that this sort of behaviour is unacceptable,” he says.
“What I’m finding as a lawyer who is at the coal face of this is that agency lawyers are much more sensitive and understanding about the dangers of misusing secrecy clauses,” Savani says.
He hopes that the movement has also led to people who may be experiencing harassment to know that they are not alone. Savani believes that there are now more people who will speak out about harassment, and those that may harass should be aware that there is a greater chance of them being outed publicly.
“If the victims are less afraid of being clobbered with unfair secrecy clauses, they’re more able to speak out. And if they’re able to speak out, protagonists have fewer places to hide,” he explains.
Low take-up
Despite the NDA and TimeTo campaigns increasing awareness around harassment, it is not always the case that employers are making policy changes.
In this year’s annual School Reports questionnaire Campaign asked its 100 UK agencies whether they had signed up to the “Make NDAs Fair” pledge at the end of 2022; just 15 said that they had.
A total of 74 agencies said they had not signed up to the commitment, 10 didn’t know and one didn’t answer the question.
As the “Make NDAs Fair” campaign was not supported by funding, Savani explains that it’s difficult to give strict measurables around it.
Campaign contacted a number of the 74 agencies that had not signed up to find out what was stopping them, but only one agreed to speak on the record.
One person who runs an agency that has signed the pledge, but only agreed to speak with Campaign anonymously, believes many large organisations think that if they look at NDAs, lots of other changes to policies will have to be done at the same time.
“It’s this sort of corporate smush of, ‘Oh, once we’ve committed to doing that, then where does it all end?’” they say.
Another reason for adland hesitating to take action may be due to employers worrying about the negative perception it could create.
Pippa Glucklich, chief executive of Electric Glue, notes only 77 out of the 304 agencies that have pledged to support TimeTo have completed the associated training that was introduced in 2021.
Writing in Campaign last month, she suggested some businesses “fear that participating in such training may inadvertently signal that a business already has a problem with sexual harassment that needs dealing with”.
The belief that sexual harassment is an “old problem from a previous era” and a lack of understanding of exactly what it is may also be causing the lack of engagement, Glucklich added.
When it comes to the 15 shops that have signed up to the Make NDAs Fair pledge, six are independent agencies and nine are part of a wider network or holding company.
Many of those that Campaign contacted did not reply, declined to comment or would only speak off the record.
One agency boss that did agree to speak with Campaign on the record is Jenny Biggam, co-founder of independent media agency the7stars. She says that nothing has changed since the shop signed the pledge.
“But that’s not a bad thing,” she explains. “We signed it because we have never hidden behind NDAs to cover up bad behaviour. Instead, we have a supportive HR team who are qualified to provide support to everyone individually, and to deal with any issues.”
The7stars introduced the pledge as part of a series of initiatives around safety ranging from bystander training, the TimeTo pledge and the Mayor of London’s Women's Night Safety Charter, which aims to tackle violence against women and girls.
Another agency leader (who wished to remain anonymous) that has signed the pledge also explains that the shop is very open with staff, and has a culture where people are able to speak up about wrongdoing in the workplace.
‘Upskill’ HR to protect victims
Some agencies that have not signed up noted on their School Reports form that they have in-house policies that encourage staff to speak out about concerns anonymously. One of these is Oliver, which introduced its “Safe to say” platform in 2021 during the Black Lives Matter movement to allow staff to speak up about racism. The business quickly realised that the policy should be open for people to speak up about anything.
Amina Folarin, UK group chief executive and global chief inclusion officer, says that signing up to pledges in the industry is one thing but questions if agencies are “walking the walk”.
She believes that when a situation gets to the NDA stage it’s too late, as the damage has already been done. Instead, Folarin wants to know about grievances as soon as they arise.
“We want to create a culture of physical safety where people can speak up about their experiences,” she explains and adds that most organisations are being passive in their approach to dealing with harassment in the workplace.
To create these safe spaces, Folarin says that businesses need to “upskill” HR teams. She previously worked as Oliver’s global people director and has held talent and HR roles at other companies including Digitas and ITV.
“I cannot emphasise enough the role of HR,” she explains. “If you create safety for HR they can be empowered to do the right thing by the individual instead of doing what’s right by the business – because what’s right for the business is to protect the victim, not the perpetrator.”
She encouraged Oliver’s HR team to put themselves in the shoes of the victim. “When people raise a grievance, it is assumed that the person wants to cause trouble, but what if they have been genuinely grieved and what does that mean for them? So it’s about changing the mindset.”
The results of this means that Folarin has noticed that people working at Oliver are generally more aware of their actions.
But there is still the wider industry to consider. Amy Kean, founder and creative director of Good Shout, a training provider for advertising and media businesses, says that she is constantly hearing stories about sexual harassment in adland. She doesn’t think that anything has changed over the past year.
“I’m not discrediting the individuals behind the [Make NDAs Fair] initiative because I think they had the very best intentions,” she says. “But I think what we’re dancing around and tiptoeing around is the fact that industry people are trying to do every single thing apart from tackle the issue, which is abusive men. No one is doing that. It makes me angry.
“You can have as many workshops that you like attended by reluctant employees who are just treading water through the process but you are not going to prevent criminals – sexual harassers and sexual abusers – from not harassing. And what people are not acknowledging is that it’s a crime.”
Whistleblowing
Whistleblowing systems, which often include phone lines, are another way for staff to speak up about unacceptable behaviour.
Three of the “big six” holding companies – WPP, Publicis Groupe and Dentsu – publish the number of reports they receive at a global level.
At WPP, incidents dropped by around 25% in 2022 year on year – there were 494 reports in 2021 and 372 in 2022. The most commonly raised concerns in 2022 were around “respect in the workplace” and “protection of WPP’s assets”.
Publicis Groupe’s whistleblowing cases rose 121% year on year with 84 reports in 2022 and 38 in 2021. The business said 70% of the 2022 cases were internal reports and 52% of cases concerned HR issues.
The latest data from Dentsu International is from 2021. Its “Speak up” platform, which is a portal where staff can raise complaints confidentially, received 38 cases in 2021, a 12% fall from 43 in 2020. In 2019 it had 35 reports and there were 44 in 2018 and 12 in 2017.
It is very difficult to draw any sound conclusions from this data about whether the system is helping people to speak up about harassment – mainly because the companies do not specify exactly what the whistleblowing reports are about.
One agency executive who wanted to remain anonymous explains that companies are increasingly encouraging staff to report untoward behaviour, for example through posters in the office, which is a positive step.
Though the change in approach is often due to external pressure, they say. They explain that a reason why companies are taking a stronger stance on sexual harassment and bullying is because there are so many more channels where people can go public with their experience. They add that a rise in cancel culture has also helped.
However, they say that it often depends on how confident someone is in their career and life as to whether they will report a colleague. So often those that are vulnerable will only speak out once they have worked out an exit plan.
‘The job is never done’
Kean’s solution to the problem is to have an independent body auditing agencies. “It’s great to get people to sign a pledge but you absolutely need to have some kind of auditing process, and that unfortunately requires some cash commitment because you need people to do the work. I would love to see the day when there is some kind of central auditing body that actually measures integrity and behaviour in this space.”
Savani adds that it’s easy to have platitudes in this area. He says that policies are meaningless unless they are implemented in a practical and realistic way. “The way that we put that campaign together was specifically ensuring there were very clear lines to ensure that there would be compliance and there’s no creeping backwards when committing to the pledge.
“That, I think, is very different to what some of the agencies are talking about of their own admission. And I think it’s an important distinction to make – having generic commitments is one thing but signing up expressly to this type of commitment which ensures this kind of thing actually stops, it’s a different kind of support for the whole thing.”
Looking ahead, the Make NDAs Fair steering group is set to meet in September to discuss the next steps.
Biggam adds: “The job is never done and it’s a commitment to continuous improvement that’s important. In the last few years there has certainly been a greater awareness and understanding, which can only be a good thing.”
Here are more New York Festivals promotions with questionable content.
Does Adland really need more evidence of sexism and #MeToo issues—as well as insensitivity for social justice and activism? (Or could the lower image also be displaying insensitivity for gun violence?)
Advertising Age reported on a patronizing promotion from Miller Lite—Ale Wives—saluting White women in brewing. The stunt spotlights Mary Lisle, noted as the first female brewer in America.
Okay, but what about all the Black women who helped the American beer industry grow and thrive through slavery? Who the hell does Miller Lite think was harvesting hops?
(It should also be noted that one of the first Black brewers is identified as Peter Hemings—who was a slave owned by Thomas Jefferson, along with his sister, Sally Hemings [no comment]—and that he crafted beer around 1820. Given that Lisle is credited with running her Philadelphia brewery in 1734, it shows how White women achieved a beer milestone roughly 100 years before Blacks.)
Regardless, it’s also highly hypocritical for a women’s tribute to come from the brand that brought you bikini catfights and breast-and-body painting.
See How Miller Lite Redesigned Cans To Honor Women In Brewing
Limited-time cans honor pioneering female brewer Mary Lisle via 'There’s no beer without women' campaign
By Yadira Gonzalez
This Fourth of July, rather than praise America’s founding fathers, Miller Lite will honor the “Ale Wives,” releasing limited-edition cans in homage to the forgotten women who brought beer to America.
The Molson Coors-owned brand will produce a limited supply of its classic white cans that carry the name Mary Lisle instead of Miller Lite, as a way to honor the woman whom the brand describes as the “country’s first recorded female brewer and her revolutionary contributions to the American brewing industry.”
In 1734, Lisle ran a Philadelphia brewery, but “through time, women were excluded from the industry as others saw an opportunity to cash in on the nation’s love of beer, forcing most women out of the business altogether,” according to Miller Lite.
‘Ale Wives’
Cans include Lisle’s name and face, the tagline “There’s no beer without women,” as well as a brief history of Lisle’s contributions to the beer industry.
“When people think of beer, they think of men; there are very few people who realize that we actually have women to thank for beer in America,” Elizabeth Hitch, senior director of marketing for Miller Lite, said in a statement. The phrase “Ale Wives” is a historical term referring to women who made beer—Miler Lite calls them “the unsung heroes who brought beer to America in the first place.” According to the brand, a recent poll found that only 3% of Americans know that fact.
Agencies on the project include DDB and Alma and Molson Coors PR agency ICF Next.
The cans come during peak beer drinking season: Fourth of July weekend has been known to prompt more beer purchases than any other holiday, given that many families and friends gather for cookouts, according to the National Beer Wholesalers Association. Americans spend more than $1 billion on Fourth of July beer and wine, according to the WalletHub. Miller Lite sees the holiday as the perfect time to school drinkers en masse on women in beer history.
“There’s no better time to celebrate and put women back into the history books of beer than on the single largest beer selling weekend in America,” Hitch said.
Miller Lite will donate $5 for each case purchased on the online retail sites Drizly and Instacart from June 27 to July 4 to the nonprofit organization Pink Boots Society, which inspires and supports women in the brewing profession. Miller Lite is pledging up to $250,000 to the nonprofit.
Men dominate the industry, making up 76% of craft brewery owners according to findings from the Brewers Association, a craft beer trade group.
“Women played a pivotal role in bringing beer to America as the first brewers here and are often underrepresented in the industry,” Erin Wallace, Pink Boot Society Board Member, said in a statement, adding that the group's mission “is to assist, inspire and encourage women and non-binary individuals in the fermented beverage industry through education.”
Fans can get their hands on Mary Lisle cans by attending an event hosted by Miller Lite in Lisle’s hometown of Philadelphia at the Devil’s Den bar on June 30, where it will be unveiling the limited-time cans. Like many other Miller Lite campaigns, the brand will run a sweepstakes, giving drinkers a chance to win a limited edition Mary Lisle two-pack. Those who are 21 years or older can enter by visiting millerlite.com/marylisle through July 4.
The Drum reported that JWT Creative Director Jo Wallace celebrated International Women’s Day by pocketing a probably hefty settlement amount—along with a public apology—for her defamation lawsuit against the Daily Mail. The case stemmed from the news publication’s coverage of Wallace related to the JWT sex discrimination lawsuit.
Which means that yet another White person—connected to WPP to boot—collected a cash award for facing discrimination in Adland.
Cue the Four Horsemen—the Apocalypse is upon us.
Daily Mail apologizes to creative director Jo Wallace as defamation case settled
By John McCarthy
Jo Wallace’s defamation case against the Daily Mail and Mail Online has been settled, with “substantial damages” being paid to the creative director following untrue allegations in the publisher’s reporting of the JWT sex discrimination case.
The Daily Mail has also agreed not to republish the accusations or images, to cover Wallace’s legal costs and to issue an apology.
Representatives for Wallace pointed out that the story “falsely alleged that the claimant was responsible for sex discrimination by sacking two straight white men as part of an attempt to obliterative their culture within the advertising agency that they all worked for. The allegation was extremely damaging to the Claimant’s reputation.”
It added: “In addition, the articles published photographs which included seven photographs … taken without her permission … from her private Instagram account. Some depicted her on holiday, including sunbathing in a bikini, others showed intimate moments between the Claimant and her wife.”
On top of that copyright breach accusation, the representatives claimed Wallace was subjected to a campaign of “online threats, abuse and hatred, even receiving a threatening message which she felt compelled to report to police for her own protection.”
It ended: “The Defendant’s publications have had a lasting effect on the Claimant as the articles were not only shocking and embarrassing but as a result of their publication and the impression they made, she has suffered substantial damage to both her career and her reputation. Further, the Claimant is particularly distressed by the impact the articles have had upon her family.”
Representatives for the defending newspaper said: “The Defendant through me offers its sincere apologies to the Claimant for the distress, embarrassment and upset caused to her by the publication of the Daily Mail article and the photographs complained of in the articles. The Defendant accepts there was and is no truth in the allegations advanced in the Daily Mail article and that her copyright in the photographs were infringed. The Defendant is happy to set the record straight and apologize to the Claimant for the breach of her rights and for the distress caused to her by its publication of the articles.”
