Confessions Of A Seasoned Judge

Folio: The Magazine for Magazine Management, Oct 1, 2002 by Abe Peck

Byline: Abe Peck

Just once the winner didn't win. Years ago, I was a judge for a publishing company's in-house contest. Issues went out, results came back, and I called headquarters to announce the winner.

"We can't go with that," the contest coordinator said. "We're folding that magazine next week."

So, second became first, and third took second. And if that wasn't the purest judging moment, it provides a peek behind the wizard's curtain at a time when nearly every magazine organization worth its logo celebrates its creativity with its own contest.

Having judged the National Magazine Awards, the Jesse Neal Awards, the FOLIO: Awards, and various other magazine competitions worldwide, I've witnessed the inner workings of just about every kind of contest out there. I've also seen every kind of entry: those that radiated victory and those that never stood a chance. In the hope of encouraging editorial excellence without blowing myself out of the jury room, here are time-tested suggestions for contestants and judges alike.

Contest Credos

Judges are asked to pay attention to the written, sometimes intricate, rules and categorical divisions. Therefore, it's imperative that entrants read the fine print. For instance, the consumer-oriented National Magazine Awards define specific standards for what in 2003 will grow to 20 categories (now with six General Excellence subsets). The business-to-business Neal Awards will use 11 categories. The Neals are judged on more open-ended criteria: "journalistic enterprise, extent of service to the field, and editorial craftsmanship."

Even in a contest with the most detailed rules, there can be extenuating circumstances. So says the coordinator of the aforementioned winner-takes-all competition who disqualified the top magazine because it was heading for extinction. The explanation went something like this: "If that effort, good as it may be editorially, isn't sound in a business sense, it exposes the whole contest to ridicule. Its winning wouldn't say 'success' to editors or management." In this instance, market viability trumped editorial excellence.

Mis-stating the entry

Many awards require a summary statement. As the National Magazine Awards put it, judges want to see "the accomplishment for which this entry merits an award." Evoking the impact or importance of the magazine/article/column/design will engage judges, especially if a relatively arcane event or field is involved.

Folio:'s Editorial Excellence Awards and other contests also evaluate or judge against a title's mission statement. A lack of clear purpose, uniqueness, or even challenge may hurt a contestant's chances.

Trophy-hunting

So what makes a winner? Enterprising journalism that has a deep impact, narrative flair, consummate usefulness, and visual excellence are just some attributes of success. For example, if your Editor's Letter merely restates the contents page, it won't connote leadership or inspiration. And while an advertorial-dominated softball title may (or may not) be rewarded in the marketplace, it's unlikely to earn the plaudits of its creative-side peers. Size, by the way, isn't everything. Scale-breaking pieces still must master packaging, continuity, and flow, or judges will dismiss them as overstuffed. ASME explicitly asks that packages be judged "on the strength of the entire entry."

Judge not, lest...

A tip for those hosting a contest: Screeners and judges should be asked to identify potential conflicts beforehand. Contest as large as the National Magazine Awards, which have 1,500 entries, build in ongoing safeguards. As an inert-but-listed contributing editor for Rolling Stone, I once recused myself after finding the magazine in my ASME screening category. This past year, an editor's story advanced while he was screening in its category - until the eagle-eyed judge gave him the rest of the day off. His article made the finals - on merit.

Comments also can reveal conflicts. Not long ago I asked a judge to refile more objectively. He knew his field, but snide comments and unusually low scoring suggested competitive bias. The judge was impeached so the contest wouldn't be.

Despite the best efforts of hundreds and hundreds of impartial judges, contests are imperfect. Stories are examined in isolation. Categories can pit apples against chainsaws. Today's mainstream can best tomorrow's great new idea. But one thing remains constant: "Incompetent" judges become so much wiser once they select your entry for an award.

Abe Peck is Sills Professor at Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism.