You are currently browsing the monthly archive for May, 2008.
The other day when i was coming home from uni, i was waiting at Prahran station and noticed this poster:
I found the irony quite amusing, especially since on the opposite platform sat this other, quite pristine poster:
I had a bit of a laugh, and i was planning to add these photos to my blog so others could share in the ironic humor. However, before i got around to posting on my blog, i came across this poster at Parliament station:
Someone has gone and “graffitied” a poster box with anti graffiti police tape… What the hell is going on? I know for a fact that this poster did not have this tape on it a few days earlier. Is this some tactic by the government/police to tackle graffiti? And if it is, i find it quite ridiculous. This is an Adidas poster that uses street art and graffiti as a motif to advertise a new pair of street shoes. It is trying to sell shoes… Yes, there is graffiti on it, but is that endorsing it? Obviously whoever put that tape over it believes so.
I put forward this question, if that poster is apparently working to endorse graffiti and vandalism, then could it be argued using the same logic that the following poster is doing the same thing?
This ad features a large paint splash and the text “Paint the town.” That’s quite suggestive don’t you think? After reading that I think i might go and graffiti some walls rather than go out for dinner in the city, just like i would go graffiti some walls instead of shopping for Adidas shoes after seeing the other ad!
It is a bit silly that they are taking the ad completely out of context to push a point. All they’re going to get out of vandalizing a poster with anti graffiti propaganda is a pissed off advertising space company.
Let me know what you think!
cheers.
