Oh I wouldn’t put it past them, but the blowback would be legendary. Corporations don’t like blowback.
Back in highschool in the 80’s in Germany we this joke:
NASA has shocking news. The USSR just landed on the moon and painted it completely red to make a point.
A white-house official got back to NASA with the question if they have white paint. After a positive replay, the white-house asked NASA on their next mission to write “CocaCola” in big letters …
yes, I know …
The reason is simple: it’s cheaper to get publicity by announcing then cancelling the project, than it is to follow through on the project (which isn’t even guaranteed to work).
Their scheme worked, too: I wouldn’t have learned about Pepsi’s new energy drink if Cory hadn’t posted about the space billboard.
Me too. As a Coke fan I think Pepsi Sucks™.
Yeah, we disbelieve them not because they wouldn’t do it, but because (right now) they couldn’t do it (in a way that would economically viable). But that last part can - and will - change. So we remain vigilant for the time when the PR stunt is not them threatening to do it, but actually doing it. At which point a boycott wouldn’t be a sufficient response - burning down their fucking headquarters would be.
This isn’t so far from real life. The grounds surrounding the Palace of Culture and Science, Stalin’s gift to the people of Poland, are festooned with capitalist logos – and the building itself is now home to a multiplex cinema
What is this “Pepsi” you speak of?
This is why we can’t have even worse things than what we already got!
I’m going to go out and buy several litres of their toxic gack, so that I can continue to not drinking the tooth-decaying poison in solidarity with your boycott! That’ll show 'em! #idliketoteachtheworldtorogerthat
They sometimes seem to court controversy deliberately(it’s unlikely that there is truly no such thing as bad publicity; but not all publicity that looks like it should be bad actually is).
There’s also the wildcard factor built into the fact that they don’t always seem to know what will provoke blowback of the actually-bad sort among people who aren’t C-level corporate decison makers or advertising agency abhumans; which means that a desire to avoid blowback doesn’t always stop them provoking it.
I suspect that even they knew this is pushing it; but wouldn’t have bet too much money on that definitely being true.
OTOH, skywriters have been advertising since the advent of flight - maybe I’m wrong.
I was a young, impressionable boy at the time that pepsi harrier ad aired, and honestly thought they might actually be offering it as a prize at the time.
no objective person could reasonably have concluded that the commercial actually offered consumers a Harrier Jet.
…thousands of naive children like myself inevitably brought in to it wholesale. And that was an ad that featured child actors, and ran during children’s programming, in between ads for Gak and Micromachines.
Skywriting doesn’t carry a risk of causing an ablation cascade that could destroy any future opportunities for flight, though.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.