Our children observe a world filled with advertising and emulate it in their graffiti. Are they responsible for not understanding that only certain people can dump branding on certain walls? Advertising is branding and expression of the company. Graffiti is self-branding and self-expression of the individual. Does that make it wrong?
If we don’t want the next generation to grow up mimicking us, we have to change our behaviours. Put glowing, self promotional garbage up on the walls, expect glowing, self promotional garbage to cover it. I know how hard it is to remove graffiti, even if you have a top shelf pressure washer from ToolsMaestro.com, this is why we need to address it at the root and change the game not the player.
And when it comes to online, it only increases. We will pay for those ads we have inflicted on our children since the late ’70s. How many millions of ads do you think they have seen? Ethical, informative advertising and information is one thing; spam graffiti banners and neons another. Let’s not even get started on the rubbish we mimic from TV and newspapers and magazines. Celebrity blogs are popular because we learned everything we know about media creation from New Idea and Who Weekly.
Intriguing that councils are allowing graffiti walls in their domain now. I guess when you hired out public space for billboards and wall posters, to those that could afford it, you have to offer something to the community who are learning to become content creators and broadcasters.
I wonder what would’ve happened if we had put ‘art’ restrictions on banners and wall posters. Hung the equivalent of Michaelangelo and Van Gogh in public spaces? Beautiful environments that our teens could emulate? Or at least one’s that excite the public discussion “that’s not art! take it down! ” “yes it is, leave it up!”. When did we learn to become so dis-engaged from the world we are co-creating? Though I agree, some ads are beautiful, and traverse both art and advertising. Not Ken Done though. Heh.