MultiCultClassics

17580: Outraged Public’s Not Clowning Around With Target.

2026-08-27T00:09:53.651-05:00

People reported Target took heat for hyping a racist Halloween costume (depicted above).

It’s not the first time trick-or-treating at Target touched off trouble. It’s also not the first time “Black guests” have been personally and/or professionally disrespected by the mega-retailer.

Given Target was among the first to diminish DEIBA+ initiatives in recent times, the latest Halloween scandal is, well, scary.

Target Pulls Clown Halloween Costume After Backlash, Says ‘We Got This Wrong’ in Apology Note

The costume was called out on social media for being racially insensitive

By Madison E. Goldberg

Target has removed a clown Halloween costume following criticisms that it evoked blackface, minstrel shows and racist imagery.

“An apology from us: We removed an offensive Halloween costume that should never have been part of our assortment,” Target wrote in a statement shared on social media on Monday, Aug. 24. “It is no longer for sale. As a company, we got this wrong, and we are deeply sorry.”

“We know this is especially hurtful for our Black guests, team members and partners,” the statement from Target continued. “Removing the costume is an important first step, and we are looking closely at how this happened and what needs to change to ensure this won’t happen again.”

In photos of the now-deleted costume, sold as “Kids’ Glows under Blacklight Circus Clown,” a young Black boy modeled the outfit, which featured a black-and-orange printed bodysuit and hood with an exaggerated smile and mini top hat.

The model’s pose, in which he stands with one leg and arm raised in a waving gesture, particularly sparked criticism for its affiliation with Jim Crow-era negative depictions of Black people, according to The Cut.

“Target, for real? I’m not surprised, but this is a new low,” comedian LaTrez Anderson said in a now-deleted Instagram Reel about the costume, per the outlet.

“The amount of people this costume had to go through to get approved says A. LOT. WHAT YEAR IS IT!?” an Instagram user commented on Target’s apology post.

Blackface is defined as “dark makeup worn to mimic the appearance of a Black person and especially to mock or ridicule Black people,” according to Merriam-Webster. The use of blackface in the U.S. was initially recorded through “minstrel shows,” in which white performers would wear blackface and mock Black people based on negative stereotypes, according to the National Museum of African American History and Culture.

The Halloween costume controversy comes nearly a year after Target rolled back Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Target CEO Brian Cornell later stepped down after 11 years with the company, it announced in August 2025. Target has faced consumer boycotts since early last year due to the DEI cuts, PEOPLE previously reported.

Anne and Lucy Dayton, the daughters of one of Target’s co-founders, called the company’s actions “a betrayal” at the time, CNN previously reported.

17579: New CMO Means WPP = Wendy’s Potentially Packing…?

2026-08-26T00:14:16.337-05:00

Advertising Age reported Wendy’s hired a new Chief Marketing Officer—who just happens to be a former Mickey D’s CMO—to orchestrate a brand turnaround.

Um, hoping to emulate the Golden Arches is hardly a McRoad to success, as even struggling Ronald McDonald would admit.

If the new CMO takes a standard approach—i.e., launches an account review including former cronies and co-conspirators—it might mean trouble for longtime incumbent White advertising agency VML. The potential snowball effect could adversely impact WPP Creative, WPP Production, WPP Media, and the entire single White operating company.

In short, lots of WPP drones might lose their lunch—and be forced to seek employment as Wendy’s or Mickey D’s crew members.

Wendy’s hires former McDonald’s CMO Tariq Hassan

By Erika Wheless

Tariq Hassan, the former chief marketing and customer experience officer for McDonald’s U.S., is now Wendy’s chief marketing and customer growth officer, Wendy’s announced today.

Hassan, who joined the burger chain effective immediately, replaces Lindsay Radkoski, who has served as Wendy’s U.S. chief marketing officer since 2024. Radkoski will depart after a transition period over the coming weeks, ending a nearly 15-year career with the brand, Wendy’s stated.

Hassan’s appointment comes as part of Wendy’s ongoing “Project Fresh” turnaround, which was announced in November. The revitalization strategy started with looking at customer data to better inform marketing. Wendy’s has had a hard time winning back customers—its same-restaurant sales have continued to fall, down 7.8% in the first quarter of this year and 7% in the second quarter. In April, the chain awarded its U.S. media business to WPP Media to more efficiently work with the fast-feeder’s longtime creative partner, VML.

“My focus will be on reigniting that passionate connection with our brand to show up more powerfully in every experience, everywhere our fans meet us,” Hassan said in a statement regarding his new role.

Under Hassan, McDonald’s marketing mined so-called “fan truths” about the brand to help inform campaigns, including its celebrity meals, adult Happy Meals, the Grimace Birthday Meal and manga-inspired “WcDonald’s” campaign, all by Wieden+Kennedy New York. He left McDonald’s in early 2025 and was replaced by Alyssa Buetikofer, the former chief marketing officer of McDonald’s Canada.

17578: Another Perspective On Whistleblowers In Adland.

2026-08-25T00:36:36.765-05:00

MediaPost published a perspective on the WPP whistleblower lawsuit that made one significant point:

Don’t rely on agency self-reporting. Demand log-level data for programmatic buys and contractually insist on third-party audits for all barter or non-transparent arrangements. If an agency claims an inventory pool isn’t auditable, treat that as a red flag.

This notion could be directly applied to the history of DEIBA+ in Adland.

That is, White advertising agencies cannot be trusted with self-reporting, as firms often inflated representation figures by counting minority employees like janitorial maintenance, security, and cafeteria workers.

Additionally, White advertising agencies cannot be trusted with self-regulation, as firms routinely engage in performative propaganda, heat shields, and delegating diversity.

Alas, no one ever succeeded in demanding third-party audits—or disputing White advertising agencies’ classic excuses for non-compliance, lack of commitment, and absence of accountability. Forget red flags—White flags are the weapon of choice.

BTW iconic DEIBA+ whistleblowers in Adland were never able to pursue a $100 million lawsuit.

The WPP scenario exposes schemes involving media, which mirrors Adland’s duplicity involving minorities.

The Foster Whistleblower Case: How Holdco Culture Enabled WPP’s $350M Mess

By Maarten Albarda, Featured Contributor

It has been a week of legal fireworks, relevant to day-to-day marketing management. No, I am not (yet) commenting on the federal trial brought by 29 U.S. states accusing Meta of designing manipulative features that addict children and harm teen mental health on Facebook and Instagram. That trial is underway in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in Oakland.

I am talking about Richard Foster’s $100 million wrongful termination and retaliation lawsuit against WPP, playing out in the Supreme Court of the State of New York.

The latest legal filings in this suit against WPP make for grim reading. Internal audit details from Sony allege undisclosed markups, shell brokers used as financial warehouses, and missing rebates disguised as principal media buying in China.

To understand the scope, let’s understand what happened. A 2023 Chinese government probe into GroupM (now WPP Media) executives over kickbacks led to criminal convictions. And now we learn that a Sony investigation alleges that WPP used 47 shell brokers to improperly retain $350 million in client rebates in 2024 alone. GroupM allegedly passed off proprietary media deals to launder those funds into corporate profit while pitching artificial “80% discounts” to clients.

I don’t think you can hold WPP corporate fully responsible for the rogue mechanics of a local scam. The individuals in China clearly acted for their own personal enrichment in a market where opacity is sadly often standard procedure.

Still, WPP corporate does not get off scot-free. It clearly missed the mark in governance. By aggressively pushing principal media trading across its network to juice corporate margins, WPP’s leadership set the tone at the top. They created an environment where local executives were guided into pursuing principal media income to bolster agency performance (and with that, their personal performance score).

If I were a juror on the Foster case, I’d view the Sony findings as a crucial signal. They show WPP built a culture where principal-beneficial buying was incentivized, leaving the back door wide open for local leadership to take it to extreme levels.

Which raises the question every marketer should ask: How many other “Chinas” exist in agency holding company networks? And why did it take a client audit by Sony to expose this?

It’s fair to say (again) that marketers should stop treating principal media as a harmless discount. When your agency buys inventory upfront and resells it to you, they aren’t your fiduciary agent anymore. They’re a vendor selling goods they own. If you don’t know the exact markup, you’re funding their profit margins (and executive bonuses).

To prevent this from happening, you should require explicit opt-outs for proprietary or non-transparent media, unless your C-suite approves a written business case. Demand clear visibility into media flowcharts and mandate proof-of-performance data down to a detailed performance level (and compare/contrast that against “normal” performance for “normal” paid media buys).

The agency model is shifting. Agencies need profit, but you need transparency. Set the rules in your contract now, or your media dollars will end up paying someone else’s bonus.

17577: On Blowback For WPP Whistleblower Lawsuit.

2026-08-24T00:41:10.517-05:00

MediaPost reported WPP made good on its promise to refile an updated motion to dismiss the whistleblower lawsuit.

Corporations typically decline from openly discussing pending legal disputes, yet the updated motion—which WPP surely knew would undergo online examination by news outlets—presented the single White operating company an opportunity to take its argument to the court of public opinion.

WPP is seeking to seal an investigation by Sony Pictures alleging WPP Media—i.e., the former GroupM firm—engaged in global improprieties involving rebates.

The motion states, “The fact that Sony has never publicly disclosed this information, and Plaintiff’s refusal to name his source, strongly indicates that he obtained the information by improper means.”

Um, doesn’t that fall under the definition of a whistleblower—to access insider information to expose wrongdoing?

In a court of law, sealing such data from the proceedings might be a legitimate tactic.

In the court of public opinion—and coming from a single White operating company boasting to be “the trusted growth partner for the world’s leading brands” and whose CEO consistently stresses the word trust—it’s just bad optics.

WPP Demands Court Seal Foster’s Sony Probe Details

By Steve McClellan

Last week former GroupM executive Richard Foster filed an amended complaint in his wrongful termination lawsuit against WPP that alleges he was dismissed illegally for exposing the company’s improper withholding and use of rebates that belonged to clients.

In the amended complaint, filed in New York State Supreme Court, Foster detailed a separate (and up to that point not publicly disclosed) investigation by WPP client Sony Pictures that Foster said supported his own claims about the firm’s illicit handling of rebates. According to Foster, that probe found that in 2023 in China WPP returned approximately $110 million in rebates to clients while it wrongfully retained $350 million in discounts from sellers. Foster asserted that WPP engaged in similar practices in other countries.

Yesterday WPP filed court papers demanding that all of Foster’s references to the Sony probe be sealed, arguing that the investigation was confidential and that Foster’s refusal to state how he obtained the report suggests that he may have done so illegally.

“The fact that Sony has never publicly disclosed this information, and Plaintiff’s refusal to name his source, strongly indicates that he obtained the information by improper means,” WPP stated in its motion.

The firm also cited a nondisclosure agreement that Foster had signed prohibiting him from disclosing confidential information related to his employment at the company.

Foster’s amended complaint also alleged that executives within the company agreed with him that GroupM/WPP Media’s rebate policies were in some cases illegal and unsustainable. Those executives, per the complaint, included Nicola McCormick, general counsel at WPP, who previously was general counsel at GroupM.

In its motion this week, WPP also demanded that references to conversations Foster had with McCormick as outlined in his complaint also be sealed.

WPP argued that those discussions “are obviously protected by the attorney-client privilege. Even the most junior practitioner knows that that privilege belongs to Defendants; it was not Plaintiff’s to waive.”

Nevertheless, WPP added, Foster “violated the privilege to prejudice and disadvantage Defendants in these proceedings. The addition of salacious, muckraking allegations and disclosure of highly sensitive and/or privileged information in the Amended Complaint cannot change the brutal truth: Plaintiff is not and never has been a whistleblower, and this entire lawsuit is nothing more than a disgruntled employee’s naked attempt to leverage an exorbitant payout.” Foster is seeking $100 million in damages.

WPP said it would “address the deficiencies” in Foster’s amended complaint in a forthcoming motion to dismiss the case.

“In the meantime,” WPP added, “Defendants’ and their clients’ privileged and confidential information remains on the public docket. This information must be sealed to prevent further prejudice to Defendants and harm to nonparties who have nothing to do with this Action.”

17576: Does Coca-Cola & WPP Open X Create An Exclusive Hilltop?

2026-08-23T11:12:31.004-05:00

More About Advertising panned a Coca-Cola advertisement created by WPP Open X featuring a Muslim family and Cat Stevens (aka Yusuf Islam) soundtrack.

The work demonstrates WPP Open X is consistently capable of generating lame creative—and probably preventing multicultural marketing practitioners from gaining opportunities to collect crumbs.

MAA Ad of the week: Coca-Cola from WPP Open X

By Stephen Foster

Coca-Cola is, or should be, the gold standard for advertising although every so often it slips off its perch. Its most famous efforts have encapsulated Americana in a way that would make even Donald Trump blush, “I’d like to teach the world to sing.”

Now, with WPP Open X, (have to make sure you don’t close the gap with the X) it’s gone well and truly global, Cat Stevens, alias Yusuf Islam, on vocals and a clearly Muslim family sitting down to enjoy dinner and with a gallon or so of Coke. Doesn’t look right somehow.

But where’s the magic, that sprinkling of stardust that got “I’d like to teach…” into cynical old Don Draper’s head? Too many boxes to tick maybe.

17575: Help Wanted—Human Heat Shields.

2026-08-22T00:25:07.489-05:00

This actual job listing seeks a partner for an executive search firm specializing in DEIBA+ candidates.

The base salary is $175k; plus, incentives could escalate income to greater than $750k annually.

Given the current anti-DEIBA+ vibe—especially in the US—it seems like a dead-end role. Yet the posting quickly lured over 100 Human Heat Shield applicants.

Probably lots of former Chief Diversity Officers from White advertising agencies.

17574: CFO CTO AIC CMO AOR WTF.

2026-08-21T01:19:57.168-05:00

Advertising Age published a perspective on pitch decision-makers that opined CMOs are no longer running the review.

The person with the final vote includes Chief Financial Officer, Chief Technology Officer, and/or AI Chief. That’s too many chiefs with not enough Indigenous people, to twist an outdated phrase. Or too many kooks in the kitchen, to twist another phrase.

The author’s closing thought: “The agencies that win the next generation of AOR relationships won’t necessarily have the flashiest creative reel. They’ll be the ones who understood how the buying committee changed and showed up ready to meet every person in that room on their own terms.”

That’s a lot of asses to kiss—an exclusive club of clients to wine, dine, and pine over.

Not a stakeholder with hiring authority: Chief Diversity Officer.

The AOR review has left the CMO’s office

By Robyn Freye

In our last four pitches, the person truly running the room wasn’t a chief marketing officer. That’s new.

Throughout my career, I’ve had a front row seat to hundreds of agency pitches—from the vantage point of an agency leader, holding company chief growth officer and as a search consultant. For years, the participant list looked the same: a brand’s CMO, VPs of marketing, and a procurement lead who showed up at the end to negotiate terms.

As AI accelerates, that list has gotten a lot longer. The C-suite decision tree is rapidly expanding, to the point where marketing leaders are often not even the stakeholders leading the review.

In our pitches, we’ve engaged with chief financial officers asking about ROI and unit economics; chief technology officers asking about data architecture and model access; chief experience officers asking about loyalty and CRM; and increasingly, AI chiefs or center of excellence leaders asking questions no one on the agency side has a slide for. The marketing brief hasn’t disappeared, but it’s no longer the only scorecard agencies are being vetted against.

Tech and finance leaders are increasingly guiding the conversation

We are seeing three things converge at once.

Budgets tightened, and every function attached to spend now answers to finance earlier in the process, not after a recommendation is made. CFOs are piling into budget conversations sooner, rapidly followed by procurement and ops leads.

Agencies used to negotiate with marketing and settle commercial terms with procurement afterward. Now those conversations run in parallel, often before there’s even a brief to respond to.

AI turned the agency relationship into a technical one. Clients aren’t just asking: Can you build the campaign? They’re asking what happens to their data inside an agency’s stack, which models are being used, and who owns the output?

In one recent review, a CTO stopped the pitch mid-presentation to ask exactly where client data goes once it enters our AI workflows. Not as a gotcha, but because it was a genuine gap in what had been disclosed. That’s not a CMO’s question, and it’s not going away as AI gets more embedded into agency work.

Growth and marketing are board-level language now. Accountability for ROI is climbing every rung of the corporate ladder, which means more of the C-suite is getting in the room for the pitch, not reviewing it after the fact.

Agencies must put more skin in the game

Most agencies still build their pitch teams for a CMO audience. But a brilliant strategic idea, delivered by a strategist, a creative and a media lead, doesn’t answer a CFO’s question about cost-to-serve, and it definitely doesn’t answer a CTO’s question about where client data lives once it enters your systems. If those questions get asked and nobody credible in the room can respond, the review stalls right there, no matter how strong the campaign idea is.

This isn’t about padding the pitch team for theater. It’s about building literacy in margin, resourcing models, and ROI methodology, and bringing in technical experts who can speak plainly about security, data governance and how AI is actually being used inside your workflows.

Clients aren’t asking for a bigger show or another slide. They’re asking for someone in the room who can answer their actual business challenges.

The next generation of agency leaders won’t just be strategists and creatives who learned to talk numbers. Pitch teams will become commercially and technically fluent by design, as comfortable defending a margin structure or a data architecture as they are defending a creative concept. Agencies that are still hiring and promoting for one skill set are going to find themselves outnumbered in their own pitch room.

The modern AOR relationship is evolving

The buying committee has changed, and the agency model has to change with it. That’s why independent agencies are punching above their weight to win bigger assignments and credibly competing with holding companies and management consultancies.

They were built to adapt to this moment. When media, data, commerce, and creative sit inside one collective, there’s someone at the table who can actually own the answer when the CFO asks how spend maps to outcomes, or when the CTO asks how the data model works across disciplines. The answer can’t be “let me get back to you.”

There’s a harder version of this problem that nobody in the room is talking about yet: procurement processes move at the speed of contracts, and AI capability moves at the speed of deployment. The agency a brand selects today based on their current AI stack may look materially different in 12 months— tools change, models change, governance practices are still being written. Brands that are serious about this should be building flexibility into AOR agreements, like capability review triggers, structured check-ins tied to AI roadmap updates, and commercial terms that can flex as the relationship evolves.

The agencies that offer that language proactively will stand out. The ones that don’t will find it asked of them anyway.

The real shift isn’t that reviews got more crowded. It’s that the questions being asked have outgrown what a typical pitch team can credibly answer, and clients know it. They’re adding seats at the table because the risk of getting marketing, technology, and cost wrong is now something every member of the C-suite is personally accountable for. When a brand picks the wrong agency, it’s no longer just a marketing problem. It’s a balance sheet problem. It’s a Board conversation.

The agencies that win the next generation of AOR relationships won’t necessarily have the flashiest creative reel. They’ll be the ones who understood how the buying committee changed and showed up ready to meet every person in that room on their own terms.

17573: Gilead US Media Goes To France-Based Conglomerate…?

2026-08-20T00:10:10.973-05:00

Advertising Age reported Gilead Sciences awarded its US media account to White holding company Publicis Groupe following a review that featured incumbent White holding company Omnicom—which had acquired the business along with now erased White holding company IPG.

The Big Pharma deal should include disclaimers about serious side effects—as dedicated-yet-dispensable drones at multiple White holding companies, White advertising agencies, and White media firms likely lost their livelihoods.

Publicis wins Gilead Sciences US media account

By Brian Bonilla

Pharma giant Gilead Sciences has awarded Publicis its U.S. media account following a review that began earlier this year, according to multiple people close to the situation. The account had been with Interpublic Group of Cos. before Omnicom acquired the holding company.

Publicis and Omnicom declined to comment.

“We regularly review and evolve our external agency partnerships as part of our regular business practices,” a Gilead spokesperson wrote in a statement to Ad Age.

Gilead’s worldwide advertising and promotional costs totaled $1 billion in 2025, up from $869 million in 2024 and $826 million in 2023, according to its most recent annual filing. The company does not break out U.S. spending. Gilead’s U.S. media spending increased to $344 million in 2025 from $285 million in 2024, according to COMvergence.

Gilead Sciences’ second-quarter revenue rose 10% to $7.8 billion, the company reported earlier this month, driven largely by continued growth in its HIV portfolio. One of its fastest-growing products is its twice-yearly HIV-prevention injection called Yeztugo. Launched last year, its sales grew 40% in the second quarter versus the first quarter; Gilead expects the drug to reach $1 billion in full-year sales by the end of 2026.

The Gilead Sciences win concludes one of several large pharmaceutical media reviews undertaken this year. Novo Nordisk recently appointed Omnicom to its U.S. media business, while Bristol Myers Squibb is still in review.

17572: War Is Hell. Cola Wars Are What The Hell.

2026-08-19T00:19:16.848-05:00

Advertising Age reported PepsiCo is staging a global review for AI marketing transformation with competitors including Omnicom, Publicis Groupe, Accenture, and Deloitte.

Given Publicis Groupe is pitching for Coca-Cola business, why are they in the review? Back in the day of Cola Wars, The Coca-Cola Company would’ve axed the France-based enterprise upon hearing the White holding company was even thinking about drinking a Pepsi, let alone angling for the rival’s business.

Given Omnicom enjoys a long history with PepsiCo—often nabbing more beverage business via Corporate Cultural Collusion—it’s a wonder the White holding company hasn’t already declared victory.

And WTF does “AI marketing transformation” mean? In this case, probably Anglo Insular marketing transformation.

PepsiCo is conducting an AI marketing transformation review

By Ewan Larkin, Brian Bonilla, and Jon Springer

PepsiCo is running a global review focused on AI marketing transformation, with a mix of high-profile agency groups and consultancies pitching for the assignment, Ad Age has learned.

The review, described by people with knowledge of the technology and platform pitch, focuses on building PepsiCo’s AI capabilities and using technology to make its internal and external marketing operations more effective and efficient.

Among those invited to pitch were Omnicom, which has a long history with PepsiCo; Accenture; Deloitte; and Publicis Groupe, whose Sapient unit is said to be competing for the business, according to people familiar with the matter.

Publicis is currently pitching for Coca-Cola Co.’s global media, data and technology business against fellow incumbent WPP, with a decision expected in the fall.

PepsiCo declined to comment on the review and the participating agencies. Omnicom and Accenture also declined to comment. Publicis and Deloitte could not be immediately reached for comment.

PepsiCo’s tech ambitions

PepsiCo has been laying the groundwork to accelerate use of technology across its business, telling investors that years of investment in data, cloud and other systems had positioned it to step up those efforts.

“We’ve been investing for five years. Our data is in the place that it needs to be. We have the backbone. We have cloud,” Ramon Laguarta, PepsiCo’s CEO, told analysts at the Consumer Analyst Group of New York conference in February.

Among the company’s priorities are automating customer ordering and demand forecasting and using virtual models to improve factories and supply-chain operations, Laguarta said. On the marketing side, Laguarta said PepsiCo is using technology to improve consumer insights, create content and personalize communications.

PepsiCo reported mixed fiscal second-quarter results in July, with international strength offset by weaker-than-expected performance in North America.

17571: More Whistling On WPP Whistleblower Lawsuit.

2026-08-18T00:15:50.604-05:00

Mediapost also reported on a new filing in the WPP whistleblower lawsuit.

The Mediapost report includes a standard vehement denial from WPP that states: “This amended complaint, filed just prior to the hearing, is an attempt to avoid its dismissal. Both complaints are baseless and without merit, and WPP will be re-filing an updated motion to dismiss. We have confidence that this matter will be resolved through due legal process.”

Can’t help but wonder how the outcome might impact Eviscerate 28. The Roserrection continues to constantly evolve—maybe WPP should be renamed WIP (Worsening In Progress).

WPP Whistleblower Amends Complaint, Says Sony Probe Backs His Claims

By Steve McClellan

Last November former GroupM executive Richard Foster filed suit against the company, alleging he had been wrongfully terminated for exposing what he said was an unlawful rebate scheme whereby the company was secretly pocketing millions in rebates that belonged to clients.

Now Foster has filed an amended complaint that details a separate investigation by one of those clients—Sony Pictures. According to Foster that probe found that in 2023 in China and likely elsewhere, GroupM (now known as WPP Media) illicitly pocketed rebates belonging to clients. In the case of China, approximately $110 million was passed to the Clients, while $350 million was wrongfully retained by WPP.

That probe followed an investigation by Chinese authorities that began in 2023 that alleged “rebate mismanagement” by several GroupM China employees.

That Chinese government probe culminated last month when Di Fei, the former chief investment officer at the China operations of WPP Media received a life sentence after being convicted earlier this year for his part in a bribery/kickback scandal stemming from that probe. Several other employees were also convicted and received lighter sentences. Fei is said to be appealing and WPP stressed that the company itself was not a party to the investigation and had cooperated fully throughout it.

The separate probe by Sony as detailed in the amended Foster complaint alleges that the rebates pocketed by WPP were hidden as part of an elaborate scheme that mixed principal trading funds with a rebate pool which were then sold back to clients.

“Sony representatives identified Proprietary Media (referred to as “PM/Programmatic”) as a primary mechanism for Rebate distribution, wherein the purported ‘discount’ WPP offers Clients on Inventory is manipulated: WPP pays a fraction of the out-of-pocket cost to acquire the Inventory, subsidizes the remaining balance using funds from the Rebate pool, and pockets the resulting margin as near pure profit shielded from audits,” states Foster’s amended complaint.

The complaint adds, “Although deployed in China, the scheme proliferated across other markets, serving as a lever to artificially inflate earnings at WPP.”

According to Foster, “Sony supported its findings with contractual language regarding Rebate policies, transaction-level financial reporting, internal emails regarding Rebate amounts, and documentation of WPP tracking systems. This evidence demonstrates how WPP was able to retain the Rebate pool funds and distribute to WPP through these various mechanisms.”

Foster’s complaint also asserts that “When Sony presented evidence that the 80% discounts offered on media are funded with the money from unpublished, ‘black box’ Rebates, the WPP representatives said they had no answer to give them, because they did not want to ‘know the answer.’”

The complaint alleges that executives within the company agreed with Foster that GroupM/WPP Media’s rebate policies were in some cases illegal and unsustainable. Those executives, per the complaint included Nicola McCormick, general counsel at WPP who previously was general counsel at GroupM. “When Foster asked McCormick directly about the risk posed by GroupM Trading’s Rebate practices, she characterized it as ‘existential,’ Foster’s amended complaint states.

The amended complaint in New York State Supreme Court, comes shortly before a hearing is scheduled on WPP's motion to dismiss the case. Foster is seeking $100 million in damages.

A WPP spokesperson issued a statement: “This amended complaint, filed just prior to the hearing, is an attempt to avoid its dismissal. Both complaints are baseless and without merit, and WPP will be re-filing an updated motion to dismiss. We have confidence that this matter will be resolved through due legal process.”

17570: WPP Media Whistleblower Lawsuit Takes More Blows.

2026-08-17T01:44:11.614-05:00

Business Insider and Adweek reported on a new filing in the WPP whistleblower lawsuit.

The filing alleges Sony—a major client of the single White operating company—conducted an independent investigation and presented the findings to WPP in 2025.

The analysis from Sony stated WPP operated a “global crime scheme” across numerous markets, including China—where the former head of WPP’s media operation in the country received a life imprisonment sentence for media-related improprieties, and two other executives were also hit with stiff sentences.

Such allegations continue to counter WPP CEO Cindy Rose’s proclamations of the corporation being a trusted growth partner for brands.

Busted growth partner appears to be a more appropriate term.

17569: Overreaction Of The Weekend.

2026-08-16T11:23:58.409-05:00

Mediapsssst reported a Louisiana-based White advertising agency created a $50k scholarship, supplemented by additional financial assistance, for students at the LSU Manship School of Mass Communications.

It’s another sign that DEIBA+ is DOA in Adland when White ad agencies deliver performative PR hyping scholarships for White students.

Baton Rouge Agency Creates $50,000 Scholarship For LSU’s Manship School

By Richard Whitman

Baton Rouge, LA-based full-service marketing agency DAA Media + Marketing is marking its 50th anniversary in 2026 and as part of a year-long celebration has announced it is underwriting a $50,000 advertising scholarship to the Louisiana State University Manship School of Mass Communication.

Scholarships will be distributed by LSU in $10,000 yearly increments over five years.

The first selected students will be awarded this fall. Criteria for selected students will be determined by the university.

“DAA has been a valued partner of the Manship School for many years, and this generous investment reflects our shared commitment to preparing the next generation of communication leaders,” said Manship School Dean Kim Bissell.

The scholarship commitment to LSU builds on DAA’s yearlong 50th Anniversary initiative to give back to the organizations and communities that have helped shape the agency’s success over the past five decades.

The agency has pledged an additional $50,000 throughout 2026 through a combination of financial and in-kind contributions. It is also continuing to invest in the next generation of industry leaders through mentorship, career opportunities, and initiatives like the DAA Emerging Leaders Laptop Giveaway, which will award Apple MacBooks to five students pursuing degrees in advertising, marketing, graphic design, or communications.

“Reaching this 50-year milestone as a company has given us the opportunity to reflect on our five decades in business and on the relationships that we have had the privilege to build throughout the years,” said DAA CEO Nancy Steiner. “That, along with our passion for mentorship, and creating the unique opportunities that our young professionals in our field need to get ahead is something that collectively fuels us as a team and as a company.”

17568: WTF KFC.

2026-08-15T23:11:16.838-05:00

Does Colonel Sanders really translate in Myanmar? Really? Or is it Colonel colonialism?

17567: On The Exclusivity Of Outcomes-Based Remuneration.

2026-08-14T12:03:39.499-05:00

Advertising Age published lengthy, laborious content on outcomes-based remuneration. Hopefully, the reporter is paid by the word—because if compensation is based on views and website engagement (i.e., outcomes), he probably owes money to Ad Age.

Ruminating on remuneration reflects White holding companies’ impact on the industry. Fueling the commoditization of Adland—whereby people, places, and practices are repetitive, redundant, and replaceable—has made most offerings generic. And that’s just one point in a long list of reasons why outcomes-based remuneration won’t work across the advertising and media landscape.

Of course, the discussions have not included non-White advertising agencies. As such shops are relegated to lesser positions in the hierarchy—often forced to deliver translated versions or adaptations of mass market campaign platforms—how might they be identified and rewarded for positive outcomes?

In short, non-White advertising agencies can expect outcomes-based crumbs—or nothing at all.

Agencies want to get paid for outcomes—here’s what’s standing in the way

By Ewan Larkin

As agency leaders scamper to move away from hourly billing, outcomes-based pricing has seemingly become all the rage. In reality, rewriting the industry’s long-standing compensation model is a tricky proposition, complicated by everything from attribution disputes to the real financial risk agencies and marketers face.

A June study from Mediasense found that 85% of agency leaders expect to increase their usage of outcomes-based pricing over the next two years, and WPP has touted a deal with Jaguar Land Rover that ties fees to measurable sales and outcomes rather than hours worked. Dentsu media agency iProspect, meanwhile, is pushing to make outcomes the center of its reworked operating model.

The shift is being driven in part by AI and automation, which are reducing the time needed to plan and execute campaigns, undercutting the logic of a model built around billing by the hour. But as much as agencies long to do away with the time-and-materials model, adoption isn’t moving that quickly. For more than half of agencies, outcome-based arrangements still make up less than 30% of their client relationships, per the Mediasense report.

The reality is, most clients—and their procurement teams—are still defaulting to models they know and understand, dipping their toes in only modestly when they do experiment. For example, while iProspect is “very open” to putting its “entire fee at risk,” the agency has no clients on a fully outcomes-based model, executives said in a June interview.

Below, the core challenges around outcomes-based pricing and how agencies are attempting to navigate them.

A definition problem

There appears to be some confusion around what exactly outcomes-based pricing is, with different agencies defining it their own way.

What WPP and iProspect are referring to is a model in which a portion of agency compensation is tied to pre-agreed media or business outcomes, with clients essentially paying for performance. In general, if agencies exceed their targets, they can earn more than their baseline fee; if they fall short, that portion of the fee is reduced. This isn’t new; agencies have long tied portions of their fees to outcomes, but many are now trying to increase the percentage.

For other agencies, what gets labeled an “outcome” is really an output, a fixed fee tied to a defined scope of deliverables.

“There is absolutely a definition problem,” said Tracey Shirtcliff, CEO of Scope Better, which helps professional services businesses manage pricing. When agencies say “outcomes-based pricing,” what they’re usually landing on, she said, is a hybrid arrangement, meaning an output-based fee with a performance measure layered on top.

“I’ve almost never seen anything that is purely outcomes-based,” Shirtcliff added, describing a pattern the Mediasense report backs up. Pure outcomes-based remuneration, the consultancy found, is “exceedingly rare.”

The sphere of influence

WPP’s contract with JLR, focused on tying fees to measurable sales, appears to be a rarity. Tying compensation to business outcomes is difficult for any agency, given factors outside its control, and it’s especially challenging for agencies that only manage one piece of a client’s marketing, whether that’s creative, media, commerce or social. (WPP’s remit with JLR is comprehensive, spanning creative, media, production, customer experience and strategic counsel.)

As a media-only performance shop, iProspect is focused on outcomes including lead-quality metrics in pilots with e-commerce and business-to-business clients, executives said. Minneapolis independent agency Broadhead has one contract tied to performance, for a direct-to-consumer client, with 15% of fees at risk based on how many people the shop can drive to the client’s website, said CEO Dean Broadhead.

The agency—which is handling the client’s creative and media duties—avoided tying compensation to sales because it didn’t design the site, Broadhead added.

Working with a DTC client helps with measurement, Broadhead said, since “you can track the breadcrumbs a lot easier.” The Mediasense report supports that notion, finding that retail and e-commerce brands are best positioned for outcomes-based models, thanks to a high volume of digital transactions, clear conversion points and few intermediaries between an ad and a sale. Sectors such as healthcare and automotive, meanwhile, are seen as less suited to the model, hampered by regulation and longer purchase cycles.

It’s much easier for media agencies to dabble in outcomes-based pricing, Shirtcliff said, as media performance is seen as more measurable and less subjective than creative work.

One creative agency executive, speaking on condition of anonymity, said their shop sometimes forgoes 10% to 20% of its fee for the first few months of a new client relationship, money it doesn’t get back if it misses agreed-upon KPIs, such as lifting brand performance, but which comes back with a bonus if it hits them. The client tracks the metrics and shares them with the agency, this person said.

This executive described taking the risk as more a way to show “skin in the game” against competing agencies in a close pitch, rather than a genuine embrace of outcomes-based pricing.

Data and attribution standoffs

Coming to a mutual agreement on the outcomes is “probably the hardest piece to do,” Shirtcliff said, “because there’s so many things that can be measured.” Sales and revenue are the metrics most tied to business outcomes but hardest for agencies to control, while media metrics are easier to influence but don’t always reflect the results clients want.

It’s especially difficult to isolate an agency’s exact role in achieving a business outcome like sales, which is influenced by factors including pricing. Sixty-nine percent of agencies surveyed for the Mediasense report said difficulty agreeing on an attribution methodology was a critical or strong barrier to adoption, and 68% cited insufficient access to client data.

Before signing up for a percentage-of-revenue deal, Jared Belsky, CEO of independent media agency Acadia, asks new clients to share a year’s worth of data to model against—whatever metric the deal is priced on, whether that’s revenue, margin or something else. Some marketers are hesitant to share those insights until a contract is signed, creating a “chicken-or-egg problem,” Belsky said.

“The hard question isn’t what data do you need to model,” he said. “Sometimes it’s just availability; you don’t always get it.”

IProspect leans on its own tools for measurement, including incrementality testing, experimentation and what executives call a “more modern” approach to marketing mix modeling. The agency has also built force majeure clauses into its contracts that extend beyond typical service-delivery provisions to cover compensation, protecting against unforeseen shocks like tariffs, war or a pandemic.

There’s a case for third-party oversight, with a neutral party responsible for measurement, rather than agencies grading their own homework. But an independent process has its own drawbacks, too. Measurement approaches like marketing mix modeling and multi-touch attribution “are too slow,” said Ryan Kangisser, chief strategy officer at Mediasense, which is why agencies often fall back on proxy metrics instead.

Managing risk

In its contract with JLR, the majority of WPP’s fees are at risk based on performance, Ad Age has learned. That’s seemingly a suitable arrangement for JLR, which is looking to rebuild profitability and cut costs, but how can WPP—working through a turnaround—afford such risk?

In a June interview with Campaign, WPP CEO Cindy Rose said the company would not lose money by focusing on outcomes, explaining there are “ceilings and floors” in the JLR deal. WPP is also allowed to buy a share of JLR’s media on a principal basis—a practice in which an agency purchases and resells inventory, often at a markup—according to a person familiar with the matter.

WPP declined to comment and JLR did not return requests for comment, but their contract illustrates a broader reality of outcomes-based pricing models: agencies need predictable compensation to fund their operating costs. By leaning further into principal inventory with JLR, WPP is effectively hedging against the risk it is taking on.

Ultimately, it “has to be a two-way thing,” said Kangisser. “If the agency is taking risk, then the client needs to be comfortable that they are going to do whatever they need to do to deliver against those business outcomes. And so, if it does mean participating in some of those areas to supplement the fee, then I think that’s perfectly reasonable.”

Pushback from marketers and procurement

There are risks for marketers with outcomes-based pricing, too. A company may, for example, have budgeted $1 million, only to find it owes $1.5 million once an agency clears its performance targets.

“It’s a variable cost,” said Broadhead, and clients “don’t love that.”

Procurement teams apparently don’t either, with 69% of agencies surveyed for the Mediasense report calling them a critical or strong barrier to adoption. Procurement’s current approach relies on comparing proposals against legacy full-time equivalent models, making it hard to prove a cost saving when the two aren’t directly comparable.

Even when outcomes-based pricing does make it into the conversation, the report noted, it often gets “diluted until they fundamentally resemble more traditional fee structures.”

Success with outcomes can be a slippery slope, said Wesley ter Haar, chief AI and revenue officer at S4 Capital’s Monks. If an agency performs really well and gets paid more, “a procurement team or new leader will come in and go, ‘Hey, this agency is really expensive. We can get cheaper agencies,’” said ter Haar.

“I had [a client] who was honest with me. They said, ‘You’re just making too much money, and you didn’t spot it in advance and tell me,’” Belsky added, recalling a deal from his time as CEO of Dentsu’s 360i in which 100% of the agency’s fee was tied to a percentage of a car rental client’s revenue.

Acadia’s founders have built in caps on how much the agency can earn on performance-based deals, along with a “reverse tiering” structure, where the shop’s percentage rate declines as performance climbs higher.

What’s next?

Broadhead is candid about his limits with outcomes-based pricing and tying compensation to performance. “For any agency to go much over 20 to 30% would be crazy,” he said. Of course, agencies’ appetite for risk will depend on various factors, including how much control they are given over an account, but Broadhead seems to be onto something.

A hybrid approach, with inch-by-inch gains rather than a full shift, appears to be the most likely path forward. WPP’s Rose acknowledged as much while speaking to press last week following the company’s latest earnings report, saying that widespread adoption of outcomes-based pricing will “take a few years.”

Mediasense’s forecast is even less rosy. A full transformation, the report concluded, “still seems to be in the distant future, if it is to happen at all.”

17566: Only You Can Prevent… NVM.

2026-08-13T00:25:33.969-05:00

Should Smokey Bear take responsibility for the extreme rise in wildfires—or will the iconic critter blame California Governor Gavin Newsom?

17565: On Outcome-Based Remuneration Regurgitation Rhetoric.

2026-08-12T00:19:31.975-05:00

Digiday reported WPP CEO Cindy Rose said, “I suspect it will take a few years” for outcome-based remuneration to take hold in Adland.

Um, it’s not the first time White advertising agencies pressed to have compensation tied to results and revenue enjoyed by brands via marketing initiatives.

Based on historical data, it will take much more than a few years. Outcome-based payment is an outdated proposition, with failed attempts dating back to the 1990s.

White holding companies—including a single White operating company—fueled the commoditization of Adland. Adding an intent to leverage AI for offering faster and cheaper services makes pursuing outcome-based remuneration outrageous.

Hell, it’s a safer bet Rose will be out long before outcome-based remuneration becomes reality—especially if her employment is based on outcomes achieved at WPP.

‘It will take a few years’: WPP CEO Cindy Rose says outcome-based pay is still years away

By Sam Bradley

Loud as the chatter about outcome-based remuneration is across the holdco space, the reality of it is still some way off, according to one of its most vocal proponents, WPP CEO Cindy Rose.

It’s a notable admission given Rose has made outcome-based pay a core pillar of WPP’s turnaround plan, overhauling how global client leaders — the senior execs running the biggest accounts — get paid, tying it directly to client growth. Getting clients to pay the same way is another matter. So far, only one has: Jaguar Land Rover.

“If you look at the history of this industry, the commercial model has been evolving for the past 40 years, and I think we’re going to have to continue to adapt because the time and materials model is probably not sustainable in the long term because AI ultimately will enable us to do our work faster with fewer people,” Rose told Digiday today (August 6) as the agency giant published its first-half earnings report.

She added, however, that Jaguar was so far “unique” in embracing the approach. “It’s going to take time for this evolution to take place… I suspect it will take a few years,” she said.

WPP’s recovery, too, remains a work in progress. Eleven months into Rose’s tenure and six months after she unveiled her turnaround plan, there are early signs from its latest earnings update that the group’s core media and creative businesses are stabilizing. To keep the momentum going, Rose said WPP would embrace a “mixed economy of business models.”

WPP’s first half

H1 revenues less pass-through costs were £5 billion ($6.7 billion), down 4.7% from the same period last year. Its creative businesses, including VML and Ogilvy, saw a 3.5% decline in revenue less pass-through costs, though its production unit saw revenue increase 1.9%. WPP Media saw revenues fall 5.4% compared with the same period last year, but Rose said higher spending from new and existing clients had contributed to an “improving quarterly trend” within the network.

Rose, who was appointed CEO last September, said the business was on track to recovery according to key indicators: new business, client retention, tech partnerships and cost cutting. Evidence for the former, she said, was in the wins for Heineken and Honda’s accounts, and retentions such as Huawei and Reckitt.

“My priority, my north star, is to get WPP back to positive organic growth,” she told analysts during the company’s earnings call. “The priority in 2026 has been to stabilize the business, make the structural changes needed, and strengthen our execution. The next phase is to build on these foundations, returning the company to growth sometime during 2027.”

The market appears to agree with Rose’s diagnosis. WPP’s share price had risen 25% following the earnings release at the time of writing.

AI plans

The company’s turnaround plan is closely tied to its AI investment and development plans. CFO Joanne Wilson declined to provide details on WPP’s token costs (the firm committed in 2024 to invest £300 million annually), but said its Open platform was a key tool for “optimizing” AI-related costs.

“We are using AI and applying it across our business. So, as you would expect, with that comes token costs… we’re actively optimizing that cost. We’ve also been very thoughtful about how we use agents across the business,” she said.

“Open is widely deployed across our business now, and our clients. We use [Open Intelligence, WPP’s AI media targeting solution] in all of our pitches. It’s absolutely front and center of our proposition,” added Wilson.

Wilson suggested that outcome-based commercial models might provide a means for WPP to operate without absorbing all AI-related costs. “In the past, our business and values really come almost entirely from people, now it’s people and tech costs. We’re evolving our commercial model so that we’re reflecting those inputs between people and tech,” she said.

What role WPP Open Pro, the self-service SME creative tool launched last autumn, will play in the holding company’s commercial model is less clear. Rose said 24 clients were now using the tool. “We’ve got a very healthy pipeline of active client opportunities, and we’re encouraged by the progress there too,” she said.

Token costs, outcome-based models and organic growth expectations weren’t the only subplots updated this morning:

WPP’s open to offers

By the end of this year, WPP will have clawed back £200 million ($269 million) through sales of “non-core” business units, to use Rose’s terminology, and what CFO Wilson referred to as the “long tail” of agencies, during the company’s investor call. It’s quite a turnaround for a company once defined by its aggressive approach to agency acquisition.

“We identified assets in the group which are great assets, but we felt that they were of more value to the outside of the group than inside. We have initiated processes on those assets earlier in the year, and those processes are ongoing,” said Wilson, who didn’t name the agencies in question. “I would expect some more in 2027.”

Staff cuts will continue

WPP isn’t the only major agency group shedding staff at the moment, but it’s shrunk its headcount by around 8.1% in the past year. The company now employs 97,400 staffers, versus 105,900 during the first half of 2025. Though most of those job cuts fell in the second half of 2025 Rose indicated this was an ongoing project, telling reporters that “some jobs will be impacted” as the company pursues £500 million ($673 million) in cost cuts over three years. “This isn’t just about cost savings per se. These actions will make us more agile and simpler to navigate, and that’s an important part of our new simplified operating model,” she said.

Those cuts mean that WPP, once the industry’s largest employer, is now smaller by headcount than either Omnicom or Publicis Groupe, which both have over 100,000 employees. Rose argued that embracing alternative commercial models like outcome-based pricing would enable it to compete.

“Moving away from a time-and-materials model,” she said, “frees me up from staffing plans so that I can serve clients with a hybrid workforce of humans and agents, and that reduces my cost to serve, and ultimately becomes a source of expansion.”

17564: WPP Metaphorically On Track.

2026-08-11T00:18:04.848-05:00

Adweek spotlighted the WPP H1 2026 report, indicating the single White operating company experienced a 5.6% decline in revenue, yet saw its stock rise over 26% after beating analysts’ estimates.

During an earnings call, WPP CEO Cindy Rose declared, “We’re on track with where we said we would be,” referring to the fuzzy Eviscerate28. Meanwhile, regarding outcome-based remuneration—a key notion in the turnaround scheme—Digiday reported Rose said, “I suspect it will take a few years.”

Not officially stated about WPP: The runaway train is being built in breakneck flight—ditto the rickety track it’s careening along. And upon reaching the dismal destination, there will be far fewer passengers on board versus when the dizzying trip started.

WPP Is ‘On Track’ With Turnaround Plan, as Revenue Drops 5.6% in First Half of 2026

Six months into its 3-year turnaround plan, WPP’s revenue beat analysts’ estimates

By Brittaney Kiefer

WPP’s stock rose more than 26% in the early hours of trading, after the company’s first-half earnings beat analysts’ estimates.

The numbers

• –5.6%: Year-over-year decline in revenue less pass-through costs for the first half of 2026 to $6.39 billion (£4.75 billion), down 4.7% on a like-for-like basis

• –2.3%: YOY decline in revenue less pass-through costs for the second quarter to $3.34 billion (£2.48 billion), down 2.8% on a like-for-like basis

• –8.4%: YOY decline in average headcount, from 106,000 in the first half of 2025 to 97,000 in the first half of this year

• –3.5%: Decline in WPP Creative’s net sales for Q2, versus a 6.3% decline in Q1

• –2.8%: Decline in WPP Media’s Q2 net sales, versus an 8.3% decline in Q1

Watercooler talk

WPP is six months into its three-year turnaround plan, Elevate28, which is designed to stabilize the business and return it to growth, while delivering annual cost savings of $676 million (£500 million) by 2028. Chief executive Cindy Rose is nearly one year into her tenure.

“We’re on track with where we said we would be,” Rose said on an earnings call with journalists on Thursday (Aug. 6).

Rose said WPP made progress on its four strategic objectives, which are to deliver growth for clients, become a simpler and more integrated company, unlock the advantages of its agentic marketing platform WPP Open, and to “create firm financial foundations for the future.”

Earlier this year, WPP restructured into four business units—WPP Media, WPP Creative, WPP Production, and WPP Enterprise Solutions—across four key regions—North America, Latin America, EMEA, and APAC. For the first time, its earnings report split its results into those units.

On the new business front, Rose cited “landmark wins” including Estée Lauder, Jaguar Land Rover, Avon, Airbnb, Wendy’s, SC Johnson, and Heineken. WPP topped J.P. Morgan’s net new business rankings as number one for the first half of 2026 and for the nine months to Q2 2026.

WPP also “completed more than 15 non-core asset disposals that will generate over £200 million [$269 million] of sales proceeds in 2026,” according to Rose. The company said it is on track to make $134.5 million (£100 million) in savings this year.

While WPP is reportedly planning to cut hundreds of jobs globally by the end of this year, Rose declined to share specific numbers, other than confirming that “some jobs will be impacted.”

“This isn’t just about cost savings per se. These actions will make us more agile and simpler to navigate, and that’s an important part of our new simplified operating model,” Rose said.

Rose touted the company’s technological advancements through WPP Open, which she said allows clients to “connect their data with signals from across WPP and our 350 data partners, giving them access to 5 billion consumers in over 100 markets, drawing on trillions of real-time signals.”

Key quote

“What excites me the most is to see how AI is fundamentally changing how we deliver growth for our clients,” Rose said. “In an environment where AI is rapidly transforming our industry and trust is in scarce supply, I believe that our commitment to client data ownership and control will become increasingly compelling.”

17563: On S4 Capital H1 P&L OMG WTF BS.

2026-08-10T00:17:01.520-05:00

MediaPost spotlighted the S4 Capital H1 2026 report, indicating the White holding company continued to experience net revenue declines. Dramatic cost cutting, however, helped to ignite a profit boost.

Gee, Sir Martin Sorrell might earn the distinction of being unable to orchestrate a financial turnaround for the biggest White holding company (WPP) and his current peanut factory.

That’s quite a range of abject failure.

S4 Shares Soar 26% On First-Half Profit Boost

By Steve McClellan

Martin Sorrell-led S4 Capital continued to shrink in the first half of the year with declines in reported and organic net revenue while sharp cost cutting led to a profit boost. The firm also declared a dividend and reduced debt during the period. Shareholders applauded, giving S4 shares a 26% bump up in Wednesday trading after the release of the firm’s first-half results.

Reported net revenue for the first half was 308 million GBP (approximately $415 million), down 6.2% with a 4.7% organic net revenue shortfall.

S4 sited continuing macroeconomic uncertainty exacerbated by the Middle East conflict as part of the reason for the revenue falloff. Also, some clients spent less with the firm while boosting capital expenditures in artificial intelligence infrastructure. “Clients continue to be cautious leading to longer sales cycles,” S4 stated.

But pre-tax profits were up 82.7% to a record 38 million GPB ($51 million). Cost reductions included back-office efficiencies and staff cuts. Total staff at the company was down 10.5% as of June 2026 versus a year ago to 6,150.

The firm downgraded its organic revenue outlook for the full year, forecasting a decline in the mid-single digits versus the previous “slight dip” the company guided to at the end of the first quarter. But pre-tax profits should reach the analyst consensus of 85 million GBP ($115 million) with a profit margin increase of 1.4%.

“We anticipate that clients will remain cautious in the near term reflecting heightened macroeconomic uncertainty, including the continuing conflict in the Middle East,” stated Sorrell. “While the macroeconomic environment remains uncertain, we see growing opportunities as clients become more selective about growth geographically and increasingly focused on implementing technologies such as AI, Blockchain and Quantum to drive efficiency.”

The Americas, the firm’s largest region by revenue, was down slightly (0.8%), while Europe and Asia Pacific were both down double-digits.

The company’s marketing services unit posted net revenues of 281.9 GBP ($380 million), down 4.4% organically while technology services totaled 26.1 million GBP ($35 million), down 7.4%.

17562: On The Highest Standards Of Hospitality In Adland.

2026-08-09T10:33:14.038-05:00

The previous post featuring a perspective opining Adland could enhance its appeal to clients by embracing restaurant-style hospitality inspired additional commentary.

To execute the notion, White advertising agencies should emulate iconic, renowned hospitality leaders:

Aunt Jemima

Rastus

Uncle Ben

Annie the Chicken Queen

17561: Shifting Geer At VML & WPP.

2026-08-08T20:10:25.777-05:00

Advertising Age reported VML North America Chief Creative Officer of Innovation Walter Geer III is shifting gear, leaving the White advertising agency and single White operating company after six years of service.

Geer claimed his resignation is not a result of the redundancies, restructurings, and RIFs at WPP.

Yet given VML boasts dynamic DEIBA+ dedication and WPP hypes alleged technological advantages, Geer’s exit is bad optics.

Walter Geer III exits VML after six years

By Brian Bonilla

Walter T. Geer III is leaving VML after six years at the agency, departing his role as chief creative officer of innovation for North America as he considers a next chapter spanning creativity, technology, culture and business.

Geer joined WPP’s VML in 2020 as executive creative director of experience design and later held senior leadership positions across health, consumer marketing, experience design and innovation. Most recently, he led a team of nearly 20 people spanning New York, Atlanta, Los Angeles and San Francisco, he said.

Geer said his decision to leave was not connected to WPP’s ongoing restructuring or recent layoffs and had been under consideration for some time. The move is effective immediately.

VML wasn’t immediately available for comment.

During his tenure, Geer worked with brands including Coca-Cola, Microsoft, Advil, Covered California, Progressive and Pfizer. Some of his most notable work at VML includes Advil’s “Believe My Pain,” which addressed racial disparities in how pain is recognized and treated and won a Gold Effie in 2025, as well as Covered California’s “For the Love of Californians” brand platform.

“I had an incredible six years at VML,” Geer said. “At the same time, I think I reached a point where I wanted to give myself the space to really kind of think bigger about what my next chapter could be.”

He said that he is not committed to a particular kind of company or role.

“I made the decision to leave because I wanted to be really thoughtful about what happens next … that could mean transforming an existing organization, creating a new model, absolutely joining an independent company or agency, working directly with a brand or building something entrepreneurial.”

Geer has been outspoken on industry issues either through social media or films such as Black Madison Ave, an open discussion among the few black creative leaders at the holding company level that was released in 2022. He is also a co-founder of Blackweek. VML will remain a strategic partner and primary sponsor of the conference moving forward, Geer confirmed.

Geer said the industry’s wave of holding company consolidation is understandable, describing it as “a necessary evil” as agencies look to combine resources and capabilities.

Discussing the broader agency market, Geer praised the scale, talent and client relationships that large networks offer; he argued the biggest opportunity lies in marrying those advantages with the speed and entrepreneurial mindset of independents.

“That combination could be incredibly powerful if organizations are truly willing and able to make that type of change,” he said.

Geer said that he plans to continue growing Blackweek while advising organizations and exploring opportunities across creativity, technology, entrepreneurship and business transformation.

“There is so much more to build, so much more to challenge and so much more impact to make,” he said. “I’m proud of what we accomplished at VML, grateful for the people who were part of that journey and genuinely excited about what comes next.”

17560: On Novo Nordisk US Media—From Rumor To Reality.

2026-08-07T00:18:15.310-05:00

MediaPost confirmed rumors the trade publication spread yesterday, reporting Novo Nordisk awarded its US media account to Omnicom.

The news happened so quickly, MediaPost didn’t even bother changing the image depicted above of Novo Nordisk flags.

Expect single White operating company WPP—which had handled the media duties since 2020—to rose, er, raise a White flag.

Novo Nordisk Awards U.S. Media Account to Omnicom

By Steve McClellan

Pharmaceutical company Novo Nordisk has awarded its U.S. media assignment to Omnicom following a review, the company has confirmed.

The firm spends upwards of $600 million annually on media, according to agency research firm COMvergence.

The firm previously worked with WPP on the account. WPP’s Wavemaker was awarded U.S. duties in 2020 after a review.

There were rumors circulating earlier this week that NN had completed the review and that Omnicom came out on top. However, at the time a spokesman for the pharma company said that no award had been announced to the contenders. That was late Tuesday afternoon.

But now the appointment is official. Here’s the company’s statement:

“Novo Nordisk has selected Omnicom as our agency-of-record to manage media buying in the U.S. beginning in Q4 2026.

“We look forward to working with the Omnicom team as we continue to scale consumer-focused strategies and connect with patients through emerging channels and technologies, helping bring even greater awareness of our medicines to people living with chronic conditions such as obesity and diabetes.”

Last month Novo Nordisk filed a lawsuit against rival pharma company Eli Lilly for allegedly false GLP-1 advertising. The two companies are fierce competitors in the GLP-1 weight loss drug category. NN founded the category with the launch of Wegovy and Lilly followed with Zepbound.

17559: Weighing In On Novo Nordisk Media Review.

2026-08-06T00:17:11.422-05:00

Mediapsssst reported Big Pharma company Novo Nordisk is launching a review of its $600+ million media account. The US portion is currently being handled by WPP.

According to Mediapsssst, rumors indicate Omnicom has already won the business.

Novo Nordisk founded the lucrative GLP-1 category—so, WPP is gonna feel very sick if it loses another ton of revenue.

Novo Nordisk Reviewing Media Account

By Richard Whitman

Pharmaceutical company Novo Nordisk is conducting a review of its media account, according to multiple sources.

The firm spends upwards of $600 million annually on media, according to agency research firm COMvergence.

The company’s last big media review was in 2020 when WPP’s Wavemaker was awarded the U.S. portion of the account where the company spends most of its ad budget.

There were rumors circulating this week that NN had completed the review and that Omnicom came out on top. However, a spokesman for the pharma company said that no award had been announced to the contenders as of late Tuesday.

“We received your note and wanted to confirm that Novo Nordisk has not communicated any decision related to an AOR,” the spokesman replied to an email query.

The company has been in the news recently—for a lawsuit it filed earlier this month against rival pharma company Eli Lilly for allegedly false GLP-1 advertising. The two companies are fierce competitors in the GLP-1 weight loss drug category. NN founded the category with the launch of Wegovy and Lilly followed with Zepbound.

17558: Bye-Bye, AI…?

2026-08-05T00:36:59.849-05:00

More About Advertising published an Op-Ed titled, “Why don’t we just forget about AI?”

Um, because most White holding companies and White advertising agencies would have nothing to hype if everyone forgot about AI, creating a chorus of crickets.

The acronym should be revised to pose this question: “Why don’t we just forget about Advertising Industry?”

Why don’t we just forget about AI?

By Stephen Foster

Later this week Cindy Rose, a former Microsoft executive, will doubtless tie herself in knots trying to explain how “agentic” deals with the likes of Google and Meta (would you join them for dinner without the benefit of a Roman-style taster?) will help realise WPP’s ‘Elevate28’ transformation.

WPP has certainly gone all-out for Artificial Intelligence, firstly under former boss Mark Read and now under Rose although it’s far from clear how it can help an agency group apart from cheaper production. Brandtech’s David Jones hit the nail squarely on the head the other week when he told the FT: “We like to believe that every person who creates is brilliant, but if you watch the basketball [on television] this week, most of the ads are terrible…95 per cent of people don’t produce much that’s creative or original. So why not do that with fast, efficient machines and let the geniuses handle the other 5 per cent?”

So why don’t agencies concentrate on the clients who do care about impactful communications (Adidas being a case in point as it bunged money into the World Cup only to frighten Wall Street’s algo-driven horses) and leave the AI wizards to squander billions on yet more ways to get bots to talk to bots? Even the IAB acknowledges that such ads gain only the most fleeting attention.

Agencies through their history have gone careering away after the latest fashion (AI now obviously but also influencers or creators as they like to be known) with no real evidence that it delivers better results than ads created by people and placed by people in media that people actually consume?

AI has become a vast circular industry where the chip makers fund the companies who buy their products. Sooner or later the musical chairs will stop and there’ll be a financial crash that makes 2008 look like a practice run. That’s if these fiendish AI inventions don’t keep escaping and bring the whole world crashing down anyway.

Agencies and sensible advertisers should steer clear.

17557: Glassdoor + Indeed = Fireworks + Firings.

2026-08-04T01:22:36.941-05:00

Adland isn’t the only industry staging questionable M&A deals.

Better together: Glassdoor is part of Indeed…?

Glassdoor has been hyping its Glassdoor Recruiter services, designed to help job seekers by mimicking Indeed offerings.

Ironically, the acquisition will likely lead to redundancies, restructurings, and RIFs, resulting in Glassdoor and Indeed ex-employees needing Glassdoor and Indeed to find new livelihoods.

17556: On Creating And Influencing DEIBA+ Change In Adland.

2026-08-03T02:16:47.101-05:00

The previous post about Equinox and its White advertising agency perpetuating racist Asian stereotypes warrants additional commentary.

Advertising Age spotlighted creators who criticized Equinox via Instagram and TikTok, including Eunnuri Lee and Ed Choi.

Lee—who boasts 108K Instagram followers and 237K TikTok followers—skewered Equinox and the responsible advertising team, ultimately vowing to boycott the fitness brand.

Choi—who boasts 322K Instagram followers and 680K TikTok followers—went directly after the Equinox Chief Marketing Officer and Chief Digital Officer, calling her out by name and blasting her professional credentials.

Creators and influencers have infiltrated Adland, delivering content, promoting brands, and wielding considerable power.

Yet can they impact progressive change, succeeding where trade organizations, clients, protesting insiders, legal advocates, and politicians have failed? That is, can they bring DEIBA+ to Adland?