doctorow at July 3rd, 2014 12:00 — #1
generic_name at July 3rd, 2014 12:50 — #2
Back in 1990 I remember musing to a friend that eventually advertising would be on rolling billboards, and on TV during your programs, not just in between. Well, I was right but missed advertising above urinals and inside taxis and tattooed on willing victims. Now I wonder if advertisements broadcast from loudspeakers, or pamphlets dropped from airplanes is next. Maybe landlords will make deals that require tenants to buy only certain products, or display advertisements inside their apartments.
quinquennial at July 3rd, 2014 13:17 — #3
Now that space is open for commercial use, I'd expect the night sky will soon look like a Hollywood photo-op backdrop.
cowicide at July 3rd, 2014 13:21 — #4
I'm frankly surprised they haven't plastered the Moon with a Pepsi Ad yet.
I'm sure there'd be a stiff fine, but it'd just be cost of business.
pixleshifter at July 3rd, 2014 13:59 — #5
The late, great Bill Hicks summed up the advertisers well.
cowicide at July 3rd, 2014 14:02 — #6
I loved that cartoon. It gave me a new perspective on Banksy, I think.
But this? 155. BANKSY: Taking the piss (explicit)
What's all that crap hound talk there? Any relation to this?
Or just a coincidence?
daneel at July 3rd, 2014 14:41 — #7
daneel at July 3rd, 2014 14:42 — #8
cowicide at July 3rd, 2014 15:13 — #9
I have to admit I kinda hope the Falcon 9 is hit by lightning (5 times in a row) and proceeds to explode at lift off.
Give us a sign, God.
samsam at July 3rd, 2014 15:47 — #10
I was confused too.
Tejaratchi's zine came first. Cory then wrote a book with the same name (inspired by the zine), and registered the domain, where he has his own blog.
Personally, I'd have thought Tejaratchi had more right to the domain name, but that's between them of course, and I guess is moot if the zine doesn't have a website.
jons at July 3rd, 2014 17:45 — #11
I've had some discussion with my kids recently, about the similarities and differences between advertising in public spaces and graffitti. Generally, I think that graffitti should be seen as more socially acceptable than ads everywhere.
But, on the other hand, sometimes advertising goes soooooo far it comes out the other side. Times Square, for example, or Tokyo.
kimmo at July 4th, 2014 13:48 — #12
I have to emphatically agree with the late, great Mr Hicks...
If you're in marketing, press play.
Now go kill yourself.
kimmo at July 4th, 2014 14:00 — #13
Getting OT, but linked in the article:
thehouseofho at July 5th, 2014 12:05 — #14
The full story is that Banksy's "Taking the Piss" essay is NOT his idea or his words. He borrows very heavily from an issue of Crap Hound called "Death, Phones, Scissors" by Sean Tejaratchi. Some would have called this plagiarism and sued Banksy, but Tejaratchi did not. Tejaratchi decided to write the whole situation off as a misunderstanding and just wanted the be credited correctly and Banksy agreed. The real problem is that the majority of the people won't credit Tejaratchi, but credit it as a completely original Banksy piece since Banksy is the more popular of the two and social media has already spread the incorrect information to the point where it has become known as a Banksy original.
cowicide at July 5th, 2014 20:09 — #15
Yeah, I had already read his thing about the mix-up, but I chose to focus on the message of the cartoon instead.
Some would have called this plagiarism and sued Banksy, but Tejaratchi did not. Tejaratchi decided to write the whole situation off as a misunderstanding
The real problem is that the majority of the people won't credit Tejaratchi, but credit it as a completely original Banksy piece since Banksy is the more popular of the two and social media has already spread the incorrect information to the point where it has become known as a Banksy original.
I have no reason to doubt Tejaratchi's explanations that it was a mutual, honest misunderstanding. The backstory about who is more popular and gets accidental credit doesn't particularly interest me.
The real problem to me is the invasive mass media marketing and manufacturing of consent that the cartoon illustrates. As someone that has had my ideas and various works absorbed without attribution from everyone from Mtv to small blogs but is just happy to see my ideas get spread among the zeitgeist - I'm just more interested in the overall message than a perceived or otherwise squabble over proper attribution for political ideas and the like.
I'm just glad the idea is out there and I'm more interested in discussing the ideas, the point of the work in the first place than infighting with like-minded people over who gets credit and other diversions from the real problems we face together as a society under attack by a corporatist right.
The corporatist right denounces solidarity via the mass media they own because they know it's one of their greatest strengths when they utilize it and one of their greatest weaknesses when the rest of society embraces it.
They love it when we squabble and divide ourselves over trite distractions instead of focusing unitedly on the big problems and solutions. They absolutely love it.
gilbertwham at July 7th, 2014 12:49 — #16
There's an SF story I can't remember the name of were a Hello Kitty face is bulldozed into the moon by marketers. Anyone remember what it is?
doctorow at July 8th, 2014 12:00 — #17
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.