Is it my imagination or are some recent marketing campaigns actually ANTI-environment? Subtly or blatantly pro-corporation and anti-democracy?
Obviously many products are not environmentally friendly, but in the following cases, I get creepy chills when I see the marketing, because they almost seem like backlash against so many of the recent campaigns that capitalize on the popularity of green products, or at least the feeling of being green. In contrast, the following marketing campaigns seem to appeal, in an old-school, nostalgic kind of way, to our desire to conquer & consume the earth.
My first example, the Sherman Williams logo:
Cover the Earth? With Paint? Is this what really sells paint to Americans? Seems rather post-war to me. Where do we go to live once our earth is dripping with paint?
Exhibit B, a recent AT&T ad, which my dad agrees with me is creepy. He sees the orange flowered vines as an invasive species:
But perhaps the AT&T ad isn't really anti-environmental so much as it is pro-corporate ownership or corporate invasion into every aspect of our lives.
The viney AT&T commercial came after another one, which was the first example I saw which made me think about the possibility of an overall bizarre trend in advertisement which, to me, tends toward an ideal of corporate hegemony or monopoly:
National landmarks are covered by a monochromatic, unending, and completely uniform covering. The people look on from inside the buildings as they are draped in orange fabric. Seems like an apocalyptic vision or an alien invasion. It does NOT make me anxious to help AT&T get any bigger, I can tell you that. It makes the idea of "coverage" all too literal.
Am I the only one deeply disturbed by these ads?
[3/28/12 I found out later that the whole draping entire buildings in fabric thing was a rip-off or homage (depending on how you see it) of the artist duo Christo and Jeanne-Claude. Interesting. I'm so quick to rant and slower to figure out what I really think. I really think it's still creepy.]
Obviously many products are not environmentally friendly, but in the following cases, I get creepy chills when I see the marketing, because they almost seem like backlash against so many of the recent campaigns that capitalize on the popularity of green products, or at least the feeling of being green. In contrast, the following marketing campaigns seem to appeal, in an old-school, nostalgic kind of way, to our desire to conquer & consume the earth.
My first example, the Sherman Williams logo:
Exhibit B, a recent AT&T ad, which my dad agrees with me is creepy. He sees the orange flowered vines as an invasive species:
But perhaps the AT&T ad isn't really anti-environmental so much as it is pro-corporate ownership or corporate invasion into every aspect of our lives.
The viney AT&T commercial came after another one, which was the first example I saw which made me think about the possibility of an overall bizarre trend in advertisement which, to me, tends toward an ideal of corporate hegemony or monopoly:
National landmarks are covered by a monochromatic, unending, and completely uniform covering. The people look on from inside the buildings as they are draped in orange fabric. Seems like an apocalyptic vision or an alien invasion. It does NOT make me anxious to help AT&T get any bigger, I can tell you that. It makes the idea of "coverage" all too literal.
Am I the only one deeply disturbed by these ads?
[3/28/12 I found out later that the whole draping entire buildings in fabric thing was a rip-off or homage (depending on how you see it) of the artist duo Christo and Jeanne-Claude. Interesting. I'm so quick to rant and slower to figure out what I really think. I really think it's still creepy.]
No comments:
Post a Comment
I appreciate your response: