The encyclopedia · Advertising & PR · Marketing decision · 2025
LePub won a Cannes Lion on a New Balance case study a journalist couldn't verify
LePub's Cannes case claimed a drop sold 45,000 shirts in a day. A journalist found no evidence it happened; New Balance said it never approved the entry.
LePub · New Balance
What happened
LePub's São Paulo office entered 'Followers Store,' a campaign for New Balance built around São Paulo FC and a geo-targeted push-notification system, into Cannes Lions 2025. The case film described fans near the club's stadium receiving alerts for a limited shirt drop and reported it sold 45,000 shirts in a single day, backed by footage of media coverage and fan reaction. It won a Bronze Lion.
Brazilian journalist Demétrio Vecchioli investigated the entry after the festival and could not find public evidence the push-notification presale had taken place. Several of the media outlets shown citing the campaign in the case film had not covered it, or did not publish in Brazil at all, and some of the influencer reaction clips appeared to have been edited or presented out of context.
New Balance said it had not approved the case study's contents and had been unaware of what LePub submitted to Cannes under its name — placing responsibility for the entry's claims on the agency rather than the client. LePub acknowledged inaccuracies in the submission, said it had zero tolerance for the situation, and opened an internal investigation; its head of creative and co-president departed shortly afterward.
The case became one of several fabrication scandals to hit Cannes Lions 2025 alongside DM9's AI-manipulated Grand Prix entry, prompting the festival to require every future submission to be personally signed off by both the submitting agency's business leader and a senior marketer from the client.
Why it happened
- An agency built an award case study around outcomes and media coverage that its own client had never reviewed or approved, so no one outside the agency checked the claims before they were entered.
- Awards juries evaluate the story an agency tells about a campaign's results, not the underlying data, which rewards a persuasive case film over a verifiable one.
- Citing coverage from outlets that never ran the story, or that don't operate in the market, only surfaces once an outsider checks each citation individually — which award judging does not do.
The lesson
A client's name on a case study is not the client's approval of it. An unapproved account of a campaign's results going out under an award entry is one unverified claim from a public retraction.
Aftermath
Cannes Lions folded the LePub scrutiny into a broader 2025 integrity response — AI-disclosure rules, a fact-checking process, and personal sign-off requirements for 2026 entries — after a run of case studies from multiple agencies, including DM9, Gut Amsterdam and Talented India, were challenged in the same season.
Sources
- Adweek — LePub Faces Scrutiny Over Cannes-Winning Case Study
- Campaign Asia — LePub head creative, co-president departs following Cannes scandal
spotted an error? The club wants to know.
More like this
Saga Falabella's mattress ad linked a Black character to mess — Peru fined it S/84,000
Valvoline dropped its World Cup ambassador after she called for a hotel siege
Stark Smart Gym's $499.000 semester promo hid its start date — SIC's gym sweep fined it
Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →

Comments · 0
Sign in to join the comments.