Behind the Scenes - Judging the Awards
As soon as the GMG shortlists come out, twin strands of elation and disappointment ripple through the gardening media world. Why was X short-listed and Y (or I) wasn’t? Who are the judges? And what do they base their judgements on? Why do we see ‘the same people’ in short-lists over and over again? And can I have feedback on my entry?
Sometimes the questions are based on perceptions rather than facts. So let’s deep-dive into what really happens with the awards judging process.
What are the GMG Awards for?
As an individual you enter an award to be acknowledged for your work. Being short-listed or winning opens new opportunities.
But the GMG Awards as a whole aim to raise the standards of communication about gardening. The people who read, watch and listen to our work are the ones who really matter. That is why ‘excellence’ is the standard.
Judges are purely focussed on the gardening content and how well it is delivered for the platform it is on.
Who are the judges? And why don’t we know who has judged which category?
Around 50 judges are invited to judge different categories, usually between January and March. They are a mix of top gardening experts (to keep the gardening content accurate) and successful media or gardening media professionals. The PGPA chooses its own judges from experienced garden/ landscape photographers, gardening and design professionals and those who teach garden photography.
At least one third of the judges are new each year, so you don’t have the same people judging the same categories year after year.
There are either two or three judges in each category and they have no contact with judges in any other category.
Why we don’t tell people who is judging what.
The gardening media world is a small one, and a few entrants may pressure friends or colleagues if they know who is judging their category. Most people wouldn’t do this – but many of us could feel upset or slighted if our friends/colleagues appear not to have short-listed us.
A full list of judges’ names is always published in both the GMG News and the Awards brochure.
You can also click here for a list of this year’s judges.
How do the judges judge?
There’s a list of about 10 criteria for each category. This will always include horticultural accuracy. Other criteria will include aspects of how useful, inspiring, appropriate or informative it would be for its intended audience.
Your entry form lists the criteria and tells you what the judges will be looking for, so read it carefully before entering.
The PGPA decides its own criteria, which includes both technical aspects of photography, such as light, exposure and depth of field, along with specific criteria for each category, such as how broad the spectrum of work is, seasonality or whether it’s a unique take on the subject.
The judges also use their own opinions and experience – it’s not just a ‘tick-box’ process.
The criteria have evolved over time, following feedback from both judges and entrants. There was a major overhaul for the 2023 awards carried out by a working group of both committee members and general GMG/PGPA members.
There continue to be new tweaks every year following feedback from judges and entrants. Once changes have been discussed and incorporated (or not), they are checked and approved by the relevant PGPA or GMG Committees.
The entry’s value to the reader, viewer or listener is important – they’re ultimately who the awards are for. And there will also be criteria that are specific to particular categories.
The judges try very hard to make sure everyone is given a fair appraisal. You do, however, have to keep to the parameters of each category and the overall rules. Things like not disclosing paid content according to ASA standards gets you very heavily marked down.
Being short-listed is the true mark of excellence so deciding the winner is the judges’ most difficult task. When all short-listed entries have met the criteria to a high standard, it may be a case of choosing, say, between an entry that goes into depth and one that simplifies an issue for many people. Which is better – a close up or a landscape? There are no easy answers.
People often disagree with the judges’ decision and it’s a sign of a top-quality short-list when they do – but the judges’ decision is final!
Why do ‘the same people’ appear on short-lists again and again?
The short answer is that they are very good at what they do. They’re likely to have years of experience and to have honed their craft.
But also - people who regularly enter awards are more likely to be short-listed than those who only enter occasionally. If you don’t enter, you don’t win. It’s as simple as that.
Some people enter an award category once, are disappointed when they aren’t short-listed, then never enter that category – or even that awards scheme - again.
But we all want to grow our careers. We all hope that in 2025 our work will be better than it was in 2024. If your work has grown in quality, then you are more likely to be short-listed. Of course, other people’s work will have also improved in that time, so you may not be. But if you don’t enter, you’ll never find out!
The judges don’t see the other shortlists or look back at previous years’ shortlists. If an entry is good enough to be in the top 5, it will be short-listed regardless of whether that entrant has been short-listed before. If you were, say, the seventh best entrant, the judges would not take a better entry out of their top 5 to short-list you because you hadn’t been short-listed previously. That would not be a fair way of judging entries.
Perception is also an issue here. In the 2024 GMG Awards there are 88 finalists. Sixty-eight of them had not been short-listed in their category the previous year. That’s 77% - more than 2/3rds - of finalists.
But the only way to keep ‘the same people’ out of the short-lists is to take every opportunity to improve your work, and then enter, enter, enter!
So why can’t I get feedback on my entry?
Awards (not just the GMG Awards) don’t give personal feedback to entries. This is in your ‘terms & conditions’ when you enter.
Firstly, it would add considerably to time and costs, which would make the awards less affordable.
More importantly, however - giving feedback is a skilled process and a sensitive issue. It is human nature to hear criticism more loudly than praise, and anyone who is going through difficulties in other areas of their lives may be very vulnerable. Evaluations such as performance reviews are usually carried out face to face with the support system of an HR department, but there is no such structure in an awards programme.
People ask for feedback because they want to improve their work, and this is something the GMG and the PGPA supports through webinars, Ask Me Anything sessions with experts from various fields and in the WhatsApp groups where members can ask each other questions about work.
Use these resources to make your work the best it can be. Then enter it for next year’s awards.
And if you have suggestions about the entry process, the categories or other aspects of entering the awards, then let us know. Your feedback helps shape the awards of the future.