Five years into running a production company, I've watched every Cannes season from the outside. I've never attended, and I've never needed to—distance often shows you what proximity can't.

Producers don't decide what wins. But we're often the first to witness the gap between what a campaign promises and what it eventually becomes. We see budgets shrink, timelines collapse, and, at times, the campaign quietly give way to the case film. That's the perspective this comes from.

The present: A smaller Cannes for India

India submitted 676 entries to the 2026 Cannes Lions, down 31.2% from last year's 982, and returned with five Lions—two Silver and three Bronze.

Many have called it a quiet year. I don't think it was. I think it was a year of reckoning.

Over the past year, Cannes was forced to confront uncomfortable questions about authenticity. Award-winning campaigns from around the world including work associated with India—were scrutinised over the gap between their case studies and their real-world impact. One Brazilian Grand Prix was ultimately withdrawn after Cannes concluded the submitted material failed its integrity standards.

The festival responded with stronger client verification, mandatory AI disclosures, and an Integrity Council. Necessary changes but also an admission that trust had to be rebuilt.

Perhaps India's smaller showing wasn't simply a creative slump. Perhaps it reflected an industry adjusting to higher standards, where compelling stories alone were no longer enough.

The past: When the story became bigger than the work

There was a time when Indian advertising reached Cannes because it had already earned a place in culture.

Think of Fevicol, Lead India, Touch the Pickle, or Share The Load. These campaigns became part of conversations long before they became award winners. People remembered the work first. The trophies followed.

Somewhere along the way, that balance shifted.

The case study became a craft of its own—a polished two-minute film designed to persuade a jury rather than demonstrate what people actually experienced.

There's nothing wrong with a great case study. Great work deserves great documentation. The problem begins when the documentation becomes more compelling than the campaign itself.

Recognition is a wonderful consequence. It's a dangerous objective. The moment awards become the destination rather than the by-product, the work slowly loses the substance that made it worth recognising in the first place.

The future: The responsibility is shared

If this year's Cannes has taught us anything, it's that integrity cannot be outsourced.

Brands have to ask harder questions about who they trust with their reputation. Agencies don't just create campaigns; they shape public perception. Before asking, 'Can this win?' perhaps the better questions are: 'Is it true?' 'Can we defend every claim?' 'Would we still be proud if no award existed?'

Agencies, too, have a responsibility not to manufacture purpose, stretch data, or build campaigns backwards from a case study. The goal isn't to impress a jury for two minutes. It's to earn a consumer's trust over years.

Production houses aren't exempt either. We're often the last creative checkpoint before an idea reaches the world. Our responsibility isn't only to execute beautifully, but to protect the integrity of the work. Craft without conviction is simply decoration.

When narratives become more important than truth, everyone loses. Agencies lose credibility. Brands lose trust. Production houses lose purpose. Audiences lose faith in advertising itself.

If India wants to reclaim its place on the global stage, we don't need to become better at winning awards. We need to become uncompromising about earning them.

The author is founder, Puff Productions. This article first appeared in the July issue of Manifest which can be bought here.