The overdue debate the media industry needs to have
The whole agency world can learn from Mediacom’s embarrassment over misreporting of campaign performance to clients, argues Mumbrella’s Tim Burrowes
I’d only been editor for about four months when we were leaked a copy of a letter to the boss of a media agency.
“I want to make you a wealthy man,” wrote the managing director of a major newspaper group.
The letter confirmed what had been a long running industry rumour – media agencies who spent enough of their clients’ money in a particular direction were getting under-the-table payouts to do so.
Great article Tim.
You have my thoughts on the piece.
Media Federation? Who do you think sits on the committee?
How about the AANA or even the ACCC?
Paddy
Tim,
This is so much bigger than creative agencies entering scam ads into Cannes Lions because of the billions of dollars involved.
Keep up the pressure. Don’t go soft on these guys. I’m happy to support you.
Paddy
There’s always been something not right about media agencies reporting on their own performance.
Where else in life do you get to grade your own work?
Hi there – I agree with Paddy on this one. It needs a genuine independent organisation to scrutinise all such claims. Call the ACCC not the Media Federation.
You could say the same re Auditors being paid for by Clients (who they are reporting on) and their usually cosy relationship, financial planners being paid commission from investment funds, the BER and builder/ sub contractor margins.
It’s hard to find a truly independent compliance organisation in any industry. Political organisations depend on contributions from business for campaign funding, so they too (Govt organisations) will be conflicted.
This is a very tough nut to crack!
The whole process via large media agencies is disgusting. It is the CLIENT’S money. I have voiced my opinion many times on holding funds, slush funds, exaggerated delivery and the fact that agencies are not honest and transparent.
Is stealing an honourable thing? Honesty pays in the long run. Client’s cannot respect our industry when this sort of behaviour exists.
We need to be rewarded for our input, and rewarded the right way. Time to be professional and honour our industry with dignity, otherwise it’s a sorry state of affairs. We cannot expect to be paid well if our behaviour is lacking. Smarten up and stop lining your pockets the wrong way. It really sickens me that after a 49 year career in the industry this bad apple is still rotting away.
Agree wholeheartedly with you Meg & Sage Observer.
This thing needs to be escalated quickly!
So why have the Media Federation been conspicuous by their absence of any commentary on this incredibly crucial matter?
Hi G,
You can find the MFA response here: https://staging.mumbrella.com.au/mediacom-audit-media-federation-says-there-are-no-wider-industry-problems-and-no-need-for-tighter-regulation-280096
Cheers
Nic – Mumbrella
Thank you Nic
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear … weak as …
I am so very glad to hear that magazines were a “thing” in 2003.
Keep forgetting that they even exist.
I remember meeting an agency once. One of the leaders of the agency said that his team often get cinema tickets, vouchers, drinks and the like from other publishers. This led me to believe that if we wanted ad space booked by this agency we needed to give gifts to the agencies staff. We already offered the agency a commission. It needs to be changed. Clients are getting far more savvy mind.
A lot of this is down to client laziness as well. This is similar to the financial advisors who used to hide commissions and get clients to invest wherever their perks were better. Although a marketing manager should have better knowledge of what goes on than, general Jo Public. (It’s easier to ignore than to confront)
Couldn’t agree more with Meg’s comment. It’s also frustrating, having spent most of a career representing the “minnows” in the media ocean (local media etc) to see media schedules being placed on such a way that suggests laziness (at best) and possibly a result of the practices outlined in your article Nic
If buying performance is a KPI of clients, who are linking some of their fee towards this element, then this is not laziness, it’s fraud. Fraud involves not a slap on the wrist, but a prison sentence, and the buyers involved should be rightly worried about that.
The pitiful thing is that this is the outcome of a system where the client procurement teams screw headline fees into the floor and force the agency to operate in grey areas like this. Agency chiefs should have stood up to clients for sure, but this all emanates from a very broken system created at the client end.