finite's Comments
Not only is it vandalism, it is clearly taking real finite resources away (aka stealing) from the municipality that has to clean it up (or "finish cleaning it up", as I'm sure some ass would point out).
Commercial advertising in should *always* cost the advertiser significantly. (Look at the one medium where it doesn't, email, and you can see why). City busses, trains, etc charge competitive rates for people to put ads on their sides. Meanwhile, this clown's public advertising actually *costs* the public agencies money, instead of funding them!
Has this guy been prosecuted yet?!
Commercial advertising in should *always* cost the advertiser significantly. (Look at the one medium where it doesn't, email, and you can see why). City busses, trains, etc charge competitive rates for people to put ads on their sides. Meanwhile, this clown's public advertising actually *costs* the public agencies money, instead of funding them!
Has this guy been prosecuted yet?!
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Wow, he's a tool!
Obviously even the people who say here that they don't think advertising this way is wrong would all dislike it if it became a widespread corporate advertising practice, or if someone decided to advertise a company they disliked on the side of their own building, or on the road in front of your home. Sure, you can just wash it off. Just like if I wrote in soap on your car windshield. But should you have to?
As a graffiti technique, it's awesome and commendable, if not legal. But once this technique is being applied (indirectly funded the most wealthy individual on earth) to plaster Xbox logos on sidewalks, it's clearly vandalism that should be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible. Both the "artist" and the agencies who hired him should be forced to pay for the the washing-off of the surrounding areas to completely erase these logos from the public spaces they were placed in, just like the real graffiti artists who get caught sometimes are forced to pay to remove their paint. It's only fair.
Obviously even the people who say here that they don't think advertising this way is wrong would all dislike it if it became a widespread corporate advertising practice, or if someone decided to advertise a company they disliked on the side of their own building, or on the road in front of your home. Sure, you can just wash it off. Just like if I wrote in soap on your car windshield. But should you have to?
As a graffiti technique, it's awesome and commendable, if not legal. But once this technique is being applied (indirectly funded the most wealthy individual on earth) to plaster Xbox logos on sidewalks, it's clearly vandalism that should be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible. Both the "artist" and the agencies who hired him should be forced to pay for the the washing-off of the surrounding areas to completely erase these logos from the public spaces they were placed in, just like the real graffiti artists who get caught sometimes are forced to pay to remove their paint. It's only fair.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
That is a really cool way to do public art, but it does suck that they're whoring out their skills to pollute public spaces with logos for Xbox and the Big Brother television show. They should have stuck with stuff like that "thank you for not breeding" message (also in their gallery). Though that probably doesn't put food on their family like Microsoft and the TV people can.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Anti-graffiti billboard with extra whitespace: hilarious.