Sut Jhally’s sobering documentary, Advertising at the Edge of the Apocalypse, highlights the
unflinching grip advertisers have on society, and the detrimental effects a
consumer-based, capitalist culture has on our values, consciousness, and
perhaps most disturbingly on the environment. Advertisers continually encourage us to mindlessly
enjoy the here and now via the consumption of material goods, and Jhally states
that voices of concerned citizens are drowned by the “powerful voice of
consumer capitalism, which speaks to us through the multi-billion-dollar
megaphone of the advertising industry.”
Resistance to this industry seems futile, considering the
reach advertising media has into every nook and cranny of our lives. I can hardly drive home to Illinois through
the cornfields without billboard after billboard telling me that I need a
McDonald’s burger, handmade chocolates, or a pitstop at Love’s to make the trip
bearable. Advertising media is unavoidable
and the corporations behind them seemingly untouchable.
But there is one movement thwarting corporations’ flamboyant billboard advertising, and not through outside protests but through the medium itself: brandalism. Birthed in 2012 by two British artists fed-up with the saturation of advertising in London, brandalism exploits the lack of responsibility and transparency from corporations and politicians by vandalizing prominent billboards with “subvertisements.” These subvertisements parody advertisements in a satirical fashion, pointing to the deeper societal and environmental problems that advertisers overlook.
But there is one movement thwarting corporations’ flamboyant billboard advertising, and not through outside protests but through the medium itself: brandalism. Birthed in 2012 by two British artists fed-up with the saturation of advertising in London, brandalism exploits the lack of responsibility and transparency from corporations and politicians by vandalizing prominent billboards with “subvertisements.” These subvertisements parody advertisements in a satirical fashion, pointing to the deeper societal and environmental problems that advertisers overlook.
The movement made waves on the internet after a stint in Paris
during the 2015 UnitedNations Climate Change conference, where brandalists installed 600 satirical
adds highlighting the paradox of polluting corporations sponsoring the
conference, posing themselves as a part of an environmental solution when in reality
they are the problem. These subvertisements
weren’t scrappy posters, they were designed by professional artists who
installed them directly into the glass cases of the original adds. Brandalist Joe Elan described their work as
an
Brandalism contradicts the idea that the medium is the
message, or in Postman’s case the metaphor.
When we see a billboard, we unconsciously expect a shameless promotion
of a product, service, or corporation.
We have become so used to billboard advertisements that their consumerism-driven
messages seem natural, no matter how twisted or dishonest they really are. Brandalism occupies the medium of billboards to
target consumers, but without the
intention of selling or promoting anything.
Instead, brandalists want consumers to look at their billboards and do a
double take. They want consumers to think about what they’re seeing and to
question it. This method within the
medium is far more nuanced than a heated public protest or rally, but the power
of brandalism lies in the fact that it takes the meaning of the billboard
medium and turns it on its head.
Unsurprisingly, brandalism has gained little coverage from
major news outlets and the overall effects of the movement are difficult to
measure. But brandalism shows that protests
against socially and environmentally detrimental advertising does not always mean
individuals marching and chanting with picket signs. Brandalism protests from within the media of
advertising itself and instead of shouting solutions it forces citizens to think
and ask questions.
Whether or not brandalism can make a noticeable dent in the
twisted advertising surrounding us today, it opens opportunities for analytical
public discourse about a consumer and capitalist culture.
At the very least, it plants in consumers a healthy skepticism for advertisements
and the corporations that drive them. I
can’t help but wonder if the critical analysis brandalism places on advertisements
would satisfy Postman. Perhaps he would prefer
a book about it.
I find brandalism to be a nice call to action, but I would argue that it isn't all that different from typical advertising. It is true that these ads do not seek to get anyone to spend money, but they do attempt to make a persuasive argument in a very small space. It is not unlike advertising for more positive causes. For example, no one can deny that the billboards for Riley Children's Hospital are a sort of advertisement. They are, to some degree, attempting to manipulate the public into doing something. This is for a good cause, but the techniques used are the same. I believe that the same is true for brandalism. It promotes something and it wants to persuade passersby to do something.
ReplyDeleteEven though brandalism still uses persuasive arguments, I think their impact on the community has a more positive intention than usual advertisers such as McDonalds. I think there is a fine line between positive and negative manipulation. Brandalism attempts to stop the reader and have them think about important and necessary issues going on in society. If anyone watched this most recent Super Bowl, there was a Washington Post commercial that brought the issue of free press. In this commercial, it depicted American journalists traveling the world to bring news to the American citizens and even risking their own lives to do so. When I saw this commercial, I was impressed of the outspokenness of the commercial. With millions of people watching, the Washington Post was making a political and social stance on the current opinion on free press. In this sense, this commercial was persuading the viewers of the importance of free press in America, so yes, they were using a form of manipulation. However, I believe this manipulation is a positive manipulation. The question remains if my opinion of this "positive manipulation" is biased on my account.
ReplyDeleteIt is definitely unsettling when you think about all the subliminal messages that advertisement presents people in our society. They force consumers to think that they can not survive without their product/service. It makes me think about how serious the connection to money our culture has. It truly runs the world so of course the advertisements are going to fuel the idea that money runs us. Thinking about brandalism is interesting because it masks as something we see every day but it makes us think. It is interesting to think about the creativity that has to occur when they make these signs and advertisements that speak about society. I appreciate the ideas and conversations that have to happen on order for these things to happen.
ReplyDelete