The irony is, the advertising industry knows everyone hates what they produce. This is why they keep looking for new ways to force people to stay tuned. —Simon Sinek
Yes, advertising is annoying at times, but can we really exist economically without it?
For people who dislike advertising, March 25 is an important day. It was on this day in 2013 that a French constitutional court judge found a group of people not guilty on a charge of “degradation,” that is, defacing property in a way that reduces its value. The persons charged had spray painted a group of billboards back in 2009, but the judge found that the actions were protected as free speech as a form of protest. From that judgement, a movement was born to eliminate the scourge of advertising from the face of the planet.
I get it. There are times when the sheer number of ads goes beyond annoying. Advertising dominates so much of our lives, especially considering that we spend such a great amount of our time involved with some form of media, whether it be social or print or digital. Everywhere we look, there is an ad staring right back at us. Blatant. Insulting. Inferring that our lives are somehow incomplete, or that we are bad at business, or that we do not care for our families if we do not buy these products. I understand: we’re all tired of seeing ads all over the place.
So, the folks at this organization in France called R.A.P. have taken it upon themselves to create and promote this thing called International Day of Action Against Advertising. Today. And while they are attempting to make this a global initiative, it seems a majority of the activity is coming from the UK, where Brandalism is located. This year, they’re specifically targeting creatives by placing display ads (irony noted) outside the headquarters of some of the UK’s largest advertising agencies. The charge they’re making to creatives is that their artistic energies are not being put to good use; that advertising is a waste of their talent.
They’re right, of course. Advertising is a waste of creative talent and all those ads are a blight on the landscape and do a disservice to society. I have absolutely no problem agreeing with the premise being made.
However, eradicating advertising as we know it only creates more problems and solves very little. An underlying objective of the whole anti-advertising campaign is that we could be putting our creative energies to use doing more important things such as addressing matters of environmentalism and human rights and poverty. Without advertising, however, we wouldn’t be nearly as involved, nor have as much information as to how we might participate in a solution to those problems. Take away all the ads for non-profits and NGO’s around the world and all the good work that is being done by those agencies comes to a screeching halt.
Obviously, the folks at Brandalism don’t mean all advertising is bad. After all, had it not been for their own advertising we probably wouldn’t have even been aware that this Day Against Advertising even exists. What they’re focusing on is the oppressive and permeating amount of advertising to which we are subjected. Everywhere we turn is another ad. And while we can deface or destroy some forms of outdoor and display advertising as an act of rebellion, one can’t do the same with all the mobile ads that account for somewhere close to 60% of the market across a great number of industries. Already, companies and agencies are putting less and less money toward print and display advertising in favor of digital because that’s where your attention already is.
The rub with digital and mobile advertising is that those ads are the economic engine fueling the Internet and everything that goes along with it. Take away the advertising, and Facebook and other social media folds up and shuts down within twelve months. All those apps that make everyone’s life more convenient go away if their developers are unable to make money off advertising. Even apps that are helpful, such as child monitoring apps and apps that remind us to take our medicine on time, depend on advertising to pay for that software.
While most creatives I know would rather spend their time creating art for the sake of art itself, those in advertising at least have the advantage of being in an industry where they can put those skills and talents to use. How many of our colleagues are doing less, working at more menial jobs where they don’t have the opportunity to create anything at all? I’m lucky that I get to spend my days taking pictures and writing. Sure, some of that goes to promoting products and fashion that I can’t afford, but I would rather be doing this than trying to get by waiting tables or some other soul-sucking day job.
On its website, the folks at Brandalism attempt to get creatives to jump ship. Abandon the advertising industry. Do something better. Unfortunately, for all the noble altruism, the movement is lacking a sense of direction. If we remove what they consider “oppressive” advertising, what replaces it for promotional communication? If creatives were to leave ad agencies in droves, what would those creatives do for income? Beg? Do something totally non-creative? I’m not seeing any great alternatives here.
The copy on the website gives a disturbing answer: “Where and how we take things from here, we’re not quite sure.”
That’s rather like saying, “Here, let’s all jump off this cliff into the darkness and hope that there are marshmallows and not jagged rocks at the bottom.”
Uhm, no.
I have no problem supporting a day without advertising. I think we need to more seriously engage in a conversation as to how we can legitimately promote products, services, and humanitarian causes in ways that are not annoying and offensive. I think we could dramatically reduce the number of billboards without detrimentally impacting the revenue stream of anyone other than ClearChannel. I have no problems with any of those goals or others that might be similar.
Asking people to quit their jobs without anything concrete to take their place is nothing short of irresponsible, however. Maybe next year you make sure you have all your own ducks in a row first, okay?
Thanks.
6 Reasons We Remember
At Rest In Formation (2015)
“What use is having a great depth of field, if there is not an adequate depth of feeling?” -W. Eugene Smith
[one_half padding=”4px 8px 0 4px”]When a young man or woman enlists for military service, especially as a volunteer, they do so knowing the sacrifice they may pay. Over the course of our nation’s history, there have been thousands of brave military personnel, both officers and enlisted, who have gone above and beyond the call of duty, many paying a price we most dread paying. Each and every one of those stories is worth telling, but neither time nor space permit doing so here.
What is often overlooked in all the combat-related stories are acts of heroism by members of our military on the humanitarian front. Military involvement in relief services around the world is ongoing, even in times of Peace. When disaster looms, anywhere people are hurting and are in need, the US Military is there, sometimes even when the “need” is only two small children. Here are just a few reasons the people conducting these services need to be remembered.
After World War II, as Allied forces first divided up control of Germany and then started arguing with each other, the Cold War created its first crisis. The Soviet Union formed a blockade preventing necessary supplies from getting to West Berlin, which was under the control of the US and UK. Two million people were at risk. The city had been bombed out and there wasn’t sufficient shelter. There was no fuel for heat. Food and water were controlled by the black market. Starvation was imminent. The US sent C-47 Bombers to Britain and for two years they made daily flights to Berlin delivering 646 tons of flour and wheat, 125 tons of cereal, 64 tons of fat, 109 tons of meat and fish, 180 tons of dehydrated potatoes, 180 tons of sugar, 11 tons of coffee, 19 tons of powdered milk, 5 tons of whole milk for children, 3 tons of fresh yeast for baking, 144 tons of dehydrated vegetables, 38 tons of salt and 10 tons of cheese every day. Their service and dedication to “Operation Vittles” kept the people of Berlin alive.
While most of US were committed to conflicts in Vietnam and Cambodia, the civil war in Nigeria created an incredible humanitarian need in and around Biafra. Non-government charity organizations (NGOs), most with religious affiliation, attempted to address the situation independently, but found that doing so was practically impossible because of the ongoing tribal wars. US military personnel provided logistical support in addition to considerable security and air support in a dramatic airlift that was at times every bit as dangerous as flying missions over Vietnam. Often a thankless task, it was frequently difficult to tell who was friendly and who wasn’t, but the US military maintained its point relief program despite criticism of aiding the “wrong” kinds of people.
A weak government and drought brought Ethiopia into the worst drought seen in several centuries. Even before the international community was fully aware of the disaster, over 400,000 people had died; that number quickly climbed to over a million. Agencies such as the United Nations and the International Red Cross did their best to help, but the government’s inability to distribute food was a constant issue. Today, popular media likes to highlight Bob Geldof’s Live Aid event as being responsible for turning the tide, but in reality it was the combined efforts of the United States military relief services with Britain and other allies that made the difference. US troops provided ground-level security while planes dropped food and medical supplies to remote parts of the country even long after the television cameras went away.[/one_half]
[one_half_last padding=”4px 4px 0 8px”]
Extensive flooding throughout Sudan in August, 1988, created a severe health crisis that had the World Health Organization and U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention begging for help. The US Army sent teams of medical personnel on immunization missions into the most remote parts of Sudan among a group of people who were unfamiliar with the practices of modern medicine. Army teams often found themselves at odds with the very people they had been sent to help and had to carefully develop relationships with each community before they were able to achieve any level of success. Meanwhile, Army medical personnel were subjected to malaria and other diseases, some of which proved fatal. Despite incredible hardship and constant criticism in far from adequate conditions, Army medical teams persevered until the threat was eliminated.
The weather sucked on 23 March 2003 at Bagram Air Base, Afghanistan. While all other aircraft were grounded, orders were issued to scramble two HH-60s not because of any direct enemy threat but to rescue to Afghan children who had been severely injured. Without immediate medical attention, they would die. The two helicopters took off in the bad weather and, for reasons unknown, one of the choppers using call sign Komodo 11 went down, presumably because of the weather. Killed were: 1st Lt. Tamara Archuleta, 23, of Los Lunas, N.M.; Staff Sgt. Jason Hicks, 25, of Jefferson, S.C.; Master Sgt. Michael Maltz, 42, of St. Petersburg, Fla.; Senior Airman Jason Plite, 21, of Lansing, Mich.; Lt. Col. John Stein, 39, of Bardolph, Ill.; and Staff Sgt. John Teal, 29, of Dallas. The children were rescued and survived.
The final entry on our list this morning is the newest, and in some ways the most difficult for me to write. It was less than a month ago when a devastating earthquake hit the small country of Nepal killing over 8,000 people. As aid flowed into the country from all over the world, actually getting assistance to people outside Kathmandu was extremely difficult because almost all roads had been destroyed. In answer to this predicament, we sent in our best: The United States Marines. Not all of those missions have gone well, though, and this past week a helicopter carrying a relief team went down, killing everyone on board. NPR has an article remembering the six Marine lives lost. They were all young; Lance Cpl. Jacob Hug turned 22 while delivering rice in Nepal. Many were parents; Capt. Dustin Lukasiewicz was married with a young daughter, looking forward to returning to Nebraska for the birth of their second child. They were all committed to helping the people of Nepal because they were all committed to being US Marines.
The men and women of the United States Armed Forces do more than carry guns, fly planes, shoot cannons, and kill bad guys. The US military represents the entire United States, doing for us what we either cannot, or perhaps in some cases should not, do on our own. Every time someone puts on a uniform, they understand the risk and it is one they assume with pride. Today, we remember not only those who served in times of war, but those who gave their lives helping others. We thank you all.[/one_half_last]
Share this:
Like this: