I don’t see how this would be classed as an advertisement. I have no affiliation with McDonald’s and at the end of the day this is a meme that will likely have no effect on their brand image given the strength of their branding already and the relatively miniscule reach of this post. I think it would be a bit overzealous to remove this on the grounds of advertising.
It’s not about you as a person, but about this imagery and its (brand) symbolism.
Having any image posted here (even if funny haha, or otherwise), containing logos of Google, Amazon, Apple, Palantir, Coca Cola, etc… would be disturbing to me. I am just wondering if others think this way.
These symbols (brand logos) have been hammered in the brains of each and every inhabitants of this planet, through billions invested in spreading the most low-level messages humans have ever invented (“hmmm!” “i love!” “this is great!” and other brainwashing concepts…). I personally love my spaces to be free from brands, brand names, brand logos, and advertising.
I respect that however I am not sure if it is realistic to be able to completely eradicate branding from a platform such as this one, especially in a meme community. I appreciate your point of view and where you’re coming from, but the problem that you’re describing is occurring at a much higher level in society and I’m not sure that it is something that can be tackled here without upsetting people.
I thought the whole point of the Fediverse was to give ourselves the chance to define our own standards for interacting as society, through experimenting, and discussing, and finding rough consensus, etc…? ;)
I see your point, but yet I don’t give up. Admitting that “the world runs like this” is a self-reinforcing mental block to convince oneself that never will ever change and that there is therefore no point in even trying.
Maybe through discussing these things openly we could raise awareness and build consensus towards onboarding more people with the idea that a corporate brand logo is not just another funny brick to build images with, like the rest, but is something loaded with power, and a history of influence, and often exploitation, etc…? And that one is always serving the interests of this company by re-using their logo in whichever way? (as the cynical PR people say “there is no such thing as bad advertisement”…)
I would somehow react the same if the faces of important historic figures were used trivially, for instance. Even if the purpose is to make people laugh, it is worth reflecting about what images/symbols/powers we propagate…
This is closer to fair-use satire than advertising (although not that close to either). It’s funny because McD is somewhat opposite to the gym, and that’s not advertising for the golden arches.
I understand the alleged funniness in this, and am in favour of all sort of fair-use (and even unfair-use!) of copyrighted, patented and otherwise trademarked material…
My questioning here, is: aren’t we advertising for the golden arches by multiplying them on our own federated servers? In people’s brains which have been filled already with this logo from the day of birth, associating it with sugar+fat tastes that speak to the “hmmm! good” part of the brains… seeing this wouldn’t trigger a “hmmm! good” reaction, you think?
Well when it is 100% associated with a negative message, constructed in a political way that makes it obvious, then it’s rather different I’d say…
Also what Banksy did was not mainly with the logo, but with the mascot, an antropomorphised character representing the brand and puting it into a human situation…
Isn’t this spam, as it displays a notorious brand name logo?
(or is it me being just too sensitive with my allergy to advertisement?)
I don’t see how this would be classed as an advertisement. I have no affiliation with McDonald’s and at the end of the day this is a meme that will likely have no effect on their brand image given the strength of their branding already and the relatively miniscule reach of this post. I think it would be a bit overzealous to remove this on the grounds of advertising.
It’s not about you as a person, but about this imagery and its (brand) symbolism.
Having any image posted here (even if funny haha, or otherwise), containing logos of Google, Amazon, Apple, Palantir, Coca Cola, etc… would be disturbing to me. I am just wondering if others think this way.
These symbols (brand logos) have been hammered in the brains of each and every inhabitants of this planet, through billions invested in spreading the most low-level messages humans have ever invented (“hmmm!” “i love!” “this is great!” and other brainwashing concepts…). I personally love my spaces to be free from brands, brand names, brand logos, and advertising.
I respect that however I am not sure if it is realistic to be able to completely eradicate branding from a platform such as this one, especially in a meme community. I appreciate your point of view and where you’re coming from, but the problem that you’re describing is occurring at a much higher level in society and I’m not sure that it is something that can be tackled here without upsetting people.
I thought the whole point of the Fediverse was to give ourselves the chance to define our own standards for interacting as society, through experimenting, and discussing, and finding rough consensus, etc…? ;)
I see your point, but yet I don’t give up. Admitting that “the world runs like this” is a self-reinforcing mental block to convince oneself that never will ever change and that there is therefore no point in even trying.
Maybe through discussing these things openly we could raise awareness and build consensus towards onboarding more people with the idea that a corporate brand logo is not just another funny brick to build images with, like the rest, but is something loaded with power, and a history of influence, and often exploitation, etc…? And that one is always serving the interests of this company by re-using their logo in whichever way? (as the cynical PR people say “there is no such thing as bad advertisement”…)
I would somehow react the same if the faces of important historic figures were used trivially, for instance. Even if the purpose is to make people laugh, it is worth reflecting about what images/symbols/powers we propagate…
Sorry for being that party-pooper here :)
This is closer to fair-use satire than advertising (although not that close to either). It’s funny because McD is somewhat opposite to the gym, and that’s not advertising for the golden arches.
I understand the alleged funniness in this, and am in favour of all sort of fair-use (and even unfair-use!) of copyrighted, patented and otherwise trademarked material…
My questioning here, is: aren’t we advertising for the golden arches by multiplying them on our own federated servers? In people’s brains which have been filled already with this logo from the day of birth, associating it with sugar+fat tastes that speak to the “hmmm! good” part of the brains… seeing this wouldn’t trigger a “hmmm! good” reaction, you think?
By that logic, Banksy’s Napalm is also advertising, but I don’t think every glimpse of a logo or mascot works in a brand’s favour.
damn, I forgot about that piece. it’s haunting, really
Well when it is 100% associated with a negative message, constructed in a political way that makes it obvious, then it’s rather different I’d say…
Also what Banksy did was not mainly with the logo, but with the mascot, an antropomorphised character representing the brand and puting it into a human situation…