Jury Checkup - Khalid Latif
As judging concludes for the Health track at this years Cannes Lions, we caught up with Khalid Latif, Global Executive Creative Director at VML Health and Pharma juror.
CR: What was the most challenging aspect of evaluating the diverse range of Pharma entries, and how did the jury navigate those complexities to reach consensus on the shortlists and winners?
KL: Assessing, critiquing and ultimately judging work for perhaps the most prestigious award in our industry is not an easy task. Judging Pharma is particularly complex because the jury has to evaluate every single entry in a hugely diverse range of categories. We're judging craft, entertainment, innovation, PR, direct and many others within several subcategories. So as a jury, we needed to make sure we were judging the work through the lens of the specific category it was entered into. We also had to make sure what we were awarding had a genuinely brilliant idea running through its core. And ultimately, the question we asked ourselves was simple: will this move our industry forward. Will this inspire bigger, better, braver work from clients and ourselves. We spent close to 30 hours in the room debating the work. That's how passionate we were about making sure we reflect and inspire our industry in the best possible way.
CR: Beyond the obvious creative brilliance, what specific criteria or subtle nuances in the campaigns truly resonated with you personally, and perhaps surprised you, as you were judging?
KL: I was happy to see so much work being entered from such a diverse range of countries and regions. It's important that underserved and underrepresented communities are supported and stood up for, and I'm pleased to see leading brands in our category doing that. I'm also pleased to see work taking a stand for women's health. For me, this is one of the most important subjects in the world right now and we as an industry have an opportunity to add our voice and make change for the benefit of women everywhere.
CR: Were there any emerging trends or innovative approaches in pharmaceutical communication that particularly stood out to you this year, and do you believe these indicate a significant shift in how the industry is engaging with its audiences?
KL: The winning work hit us in the gut. It made us feel something. Overall the work was human, culturally relevant, bold and, dare I say, entertaining. Some specific trends I noted:
Humour Belongs in Pharma
Health is serious—but that doesn’t mean every campaign has to be. Humour is one of the most powerful tools in advertising, yet it’s often missing in Pharma. I was delighted to see more work use levity and wit to make messages more memorable and relatable.
Consistently great (human) craft
AI is everywhere. But in pharma, where nuance and empathy matter, I was happy to see a resurgence of analogue creativity, tactile design, and storytelling that feels unapologetically made by humans. The kind of artistry AI can’t fake. And, in the pieces that rose to the tops of our list, the craft was there for a reason. The medium was the message. Cocreated with patients, or visceral in their feel. Finally, in pharma, we’re seeing great craft as standard, not as a surprise.
Work taking a stand
Now is not the time for any company, least of all pharma companies, to be sitting on the fence. There were pieces of work that took a stand. That established its position on a side and attempted to make a positive impact in the world – be that on an underserved community, a country, or for women everywhere. Creativity is no longer neutral.
NO MORE HIPPOCRITES / WISP / EVERSANA INTOUCH / SILVER LION
CR: Considering the strict regulatory environment of Pharma, how did the jury balance the need for compliance and scientific accuracy with the desire for groundbreaking creativity and emotional impact? Can you give an example of a campaign that achieved this balance exceptionally well?
KL: No one can deny the challenges we have creating great work in pharma. Compliance and scientific accuracy are intrinsic to what we do. We make a conscious decision to take those factors into account when shortlisting work. And when it came to elevating work to metal, these conversations became more important. The work has to reflect our industry and show the world that we can make category-transcending work, despite the strict regulations we experience every day. The grand prix was an example. It's essentially a beautifully crafted, tasteful, product demo. Real couples having sex for hours featuring men who suffer from the problem. Regulations meant that the film couldn't make any claims or implications that sex can last for longer than the product actually allows. And how do you speak about the most intimate moment, without being able to show that most intimate moment? They hid it in plain sight. This was taken into account by the producers of the work. So in this case, the balance was achieved.
CR: What was the most rewarding or enjoyable part of your experience as a Cannes Lions Pharma juror? Was there a particular moment, discussion, or campaign that left a lasting positive impression on you?
KL: This was my first time on a Cannes jury, and I was lucky to be on two - The Pharma Lions jury and the Grand Prix for Good. I went into it ready to be in awe of the work, the process, the pressure, and my fellow jurors. The work was judged with honesty, integrity and empathy, and I found myself listening a lot. Trying to learn and understand how other leaders in our industry analyse and dissect work. I treated it a bit like a masterclass. You're surrounded by brilliance and this is an opportunity to learn from it. Another invaluable point was the diverse range of cultural experiences in the room. You cannot assess a piece of work completely and fairly without having a view on how it really impacts a culture, region or country you have no experience of. It reminded me that, when we as creatives come up with an idea, we have to consider how other cultures will feel about it and how it might resonate and impact those communities.
CR: Looking back at the winning work, what do you hope the broader pharmaceutical industry takes away from the campaigns that were celebrated this year? What message do these winners send about the future of effective pharma marketing?
KL: I hope the industry sees that we can make work that transcends our category. We can lean into real, genuinely entertaining, comedic ideas and bring them to life in original ways. We can use craft to communicate a message. Innovation comes in many shapes and it doesn't always have to be complex or expensive. It's right to stand up and have an opinion in the face of political pressures. And we can and should take a stand for underrepresented and underserved communities. We often talk about taking risks. Now, it's a risk to not take that leap of faith and run with an idea that might make you feel uncomfortable. Because if we don't, we risk being left behind. I'm excited about the future of our industry and I can't wait to see how far we can move it forward.
