Pay-to-Play Awards and the Mirage of Credibility

Did you know that there were 8 judges hired by the Emjays organizers who ultimately made the winner decision? So why did you have to vote everyday (on a very flawed interface) for your favorite nominee? Read on to find out.

The cannabis industry loves to celebrate itself, but behind the glittering trophies and self-congratulatory applause of events like the Emjays and MJBizCon lies a deeply flawed system. What should be a moment to honor innovation and excellence has devolved into a thinly veiled marketing competition and a blatant exercise in pay-to-play favoritism. This is more than just a critique; it’s a call to action for an industry struggling to uphold its values of transparency and fairness.

The Voting System That Doesn’t Add Up

The Emjays seemed on the surface to rely heavily on public voting, encouraging nominees to mount extensive campaigns to rally their networks to vote daily on the Emjays site. The goal; rally your community to push you to the top. For weeks, inboxes and social media feeds were flooded with daily reminders to vote.

But here’s the twist: the votes don’t actually decide the winner.

Instead, an eight-judge panel makes the final decision, effectively rendering the public voting effort meaningless. This lack of transparency leaves participants and their supporters in the dark. “Make the votes public,” I argued during a recent discussion with Brad Bogus and Shelby Poole. “Even Dancing with the Stars balances audience votes with judge scores and does it in full view of the public.”

As Brad aptly put it, “The lack of transparency erodes the credibility of the Emjays. If you’re going to have a panel of judges overriding public votes, at least be upfront about it.”

A Marketing Competition in Disguise

What’s even more frustrating is the way the Emjays capitalize on the nominees' marketing efforts (and expertise). The awards are structured to incentivize campaigns where nominees create free advertising for the Emjays themselves. From PR agencies to hemp brands, the biggest names in cannabis spend weeks posting, emailing, and engaging their audiences to generate votes.

This is a strategic move by the Emjays to drive visibility for the event without spending a dime. “It’s genius,” I noted during the call. “They’ve turned the industry’s top marketers into unpaid promoters, working tirelessly to amplify their brand. But at the end of the day, it feels like a bait-and-switch because the votes don’t matter.”

One of the commenters to our Livestream on Weds who is a conference company CEO said that likely agencies offer free marketing services explicitly to the Emjays in trade for the win. I didn't say it, but someone who knows more than I do did.

Pay-to-Play and the Cost of Visibility

Participating in the Emjays isn’t just a time investment; it’s a financial one. Nominees often spend thousands of dollars on travel, accommodations, and campaigns to attend the awards, hoping for the ROI of increased credibility. But as one attendee remarked, “It feels like everyone is just circle-jerking for titles to put on their website, while the real issues—reaching consumers and growing the market—are ignored.”

Adding insult to injury, it appears that winners often have close ties to the organizers or are positioned to spend the most money in future sponsorships. This raises serious questions about whether these awards honor merit or simply reward those who play the game the best.

MJBiz’s Monetization of Free Labor

The issues extend beyond the Emjays to MJBizCon itself, the industry’s largest conference. Speakers at MJBizCon are unpaid, yet they are expected to cover their own travel. In return, they’re given the promise of exposure—which does not pay the bills.

Now, MJBizCon has taken it a step further by repackaging speaker content and selling it to those who couldn’t attend the event. For $49, anyone can access a track of presentations—a clever revenue stream for MJBizCon but a slap in the face to the speakers who were never compensated for their time or expertise. “Speakers are essentially creating marketing content for MJBiz for free,” I pointed out on Weds, “and now they’re profiting off that content without offering royalties or even notifying speakers in advance.”

As Brad noted, “If this was disclosed upfront and positioned as part of the speaker agreement, it might be more palatable. But to monetize their work without transparency? That’s exploitation.”

The ROI of Awards

One of the most damning elements of the Emjays is the lack of accountability around their judging process. My own experience with a nominee, Wu, highlights this issue. Despite an enormous grassroots voting campaign with daily posts and significant effort, she didn’t win. Meanwhile, another winner, who hadn’t visibly campaigned, walked away with the trophy. The winner's podcast is award-worthy indeed, but how was she and the others really chosen?

The lack of transparency fuels speculation. Was the winner selected for their connections to MJBiz? Were the judges influenced by potential sponsorship dollars? Without clear criteria or a published voting breakdown, it’s impossible to know.

The public votes, but the decision is ultimately made behind closed doors? Just like in politics, this breeds distrust and disillusionment.

What Needs to Change

The Emjays and MJBizCon could—and should—be leaders in creating fair, transparent systems that reflect the industry’s values. Here’s how they can start:

1. Make Votes Public: If public voting is part of the process, it needs to be weighted and visible. Publish the vote counts alongside judge scores.
2. Transparent Judging: Reveal who the judges are, what criteria they’re using, and how their decisions factor into the outcome. Celebrate the judges and their expertise.
3. Compensate Speakers: If MJBizCon is profiting from speaker content, those speakers deserve royalties or upfront compensation.
4. Reevaluate Award Categories: Podcasters, Twitch streamers, and other creators shouldn’t be lumped into one category. Each discipline deserves its own recognition.
5. Separate Marketing from Merit: Awards should honor quality and innovation, not who has the largest marketing budget or closest connections to the organizers.

The Bottom Line

Cannabis is an industry built on the ideals of fairness, community, and innovation. But covert pay-for-play undermines those principles with opaque processes and exploitative practices. If we want to move forward, we need to demand better—not just for the winners but for everyone who contributes to this industry.

It’s time for cannabis to stop mirroring the broken systems of other industries and create its own path rooted in authenticity and equity. How can we hold the gatekeepers accountable and build something we can all be proud of.