This is an insight on how judges mark your submissions. A lot of marks go to the actual submission itself. Remember that a judge is looking at anywhere from 5 to 15 nominations. Assume they know nothing of you or the campaign. You need to explain the submission in plain English. You need to give proper metrics not percentages or “great reaction”.
Judges are randomly assigned nominations and categories. 4-6 judges will look at your submission on average. Judges do not see what the other judges have given as we have found a strong minded judge can skew marks.
This is what we tell judges:
Nomination:
Evaluate the nomination itself. Does it explain to a layperson what they’re doing specifically in this category of social media? Would you consider this as worthy enough to put in a case study for example?
Examples
Are there examples supplied of their social media in action or people interacting with their social media? Are they recent and match the nomination and the audience? Examples are very important, if none are supplied, award zero points.
Metrics
Are the supplied metrics relevant? Do you think they’re valid? Should other metrics have been used?
How do the metrics look? Are they paid for results or organic?
More on how some categories are scored:
