Photo
5 years ago
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog List
-
-
"Bocoran" Soal UN Bahasa Arab SMA 20169 years ago
-
Cheap food, cheap design.10 years ago
-
June favorites10 years ago
-
Needing some Type inspiration?12 years ago
-
-
Dulux - Own a colour13 years ago
-
Seasons In The Sun13 years ago
-
Holy Cow! We Got Tweeted!14 years ago
-
Perfect for the Procrastinator14 years ago
-
-
-
What's Next...Disposable Hands?14 years ago
-
-
-
Rationale14 years ago
-
Rationale14 years ago
-
Rationale14 years ago
-
Blog rationale14 years ago
-
Get stabbed, start an art movement14 years ago
-
Rationale14 years ago
-
Print/Illustration: Oliver Munday14 years ago
-
Romance14 years ago
-
The Saatchi Gallery- Shoebox Art14 years ago
-
-
-
-
-
12 comments:
...well it looks like we’re all doomed, and our kids are even more doomed. To be fair, the advertising industry isn’t very environmentally friendly - Think of all the paper that is used in sketching out an idea, the print outs and proofs - even electronic proofs tend to get printed out in my experience... and then all the time spent on your mac during the design process. Digital advertising is probably assumed to be more environmentally friendly than print advertising but a cd/dvd/film reel compared to a stack of paper will take longer to degrade and probably releases more chemicals into the environment - and i imagine uses more energy to produce and one could also argue good quality digital advertising encourages more people to spend longer on their computer, tv, etc. I suppose one form of advertising’s effect on the environment is as bad as the other!
We generally are selfish though - we want things to look good - it’s part of our job, we don’t really care if it effects generations to come - at work we recently got some flyers printed on recycled paper and they came back and smelt odd and the ink is absorbed much more - not ideal; but socially responsible...It depends where your loyalties lie - and what level of corporate social responsibility you want to portray - being ‘green’ is not for generations to come, it‘s for your image! I think we all like to think we’re doing our bit - by buying fairy concentrate instead of powder, or buying a Seat instead of a Jeep but at the end of the day our hearts aren’t really in it - we’re not trying that hard...
Sut Jhally talks about ‘cutting the clutter’, i.e instead of bombarding people with advertising in order for them to notice it, use more shocking/disturbing images to save the planet. (That’s how I interpretted what he was saying anyway) It may save the planet and he’s right that because we’re so used to advertising we only take notice of things that stir our emotions...but we don’t want to destroy the population as an alternative! Too much exposure to violence/hatred/sex whatever is surely just going to turn us into a nation of just that! God help my children and grandchildren!...
He's too late,,
no one blames advertising anymore,
well maybe Banksy,
but no one likes him these days.
Everyone knows those cheeky scientist where lying to us, so people like him could scare us into buying their organic free range carrots.
{James}
Quite a negative view of the advertising industry to say the least, but I guess it also makes some valid and interesting points.
I agree with the initial argument that advertising has no interest in the long term, but is far more concerned with the short-term, getting the attention of the relevant consumer and selling the product/service. Like Becky mentioned above, the advertising industry isnt environmentally friendly and in the production/communication of it's messages is only adding to the growing problems facing our planet. The increasingly noticable trend of being 'green' is slowly creeping into more and more advertisements in an attempt to appeal to the conscious of the consumer but it's ironic the producer of these green messages is probably doing more harm than good. But then, advertising being more environmentally-friendly in it's production isnt going to make that great a difference if nothing else changes.
The idea that advertising is moving from a cognitive approach towards increasingly emotional tactics in order to get through to the consumer also raises some points. On one hand, yes, today we probably do see far more violent/sexual/shocking images than we did ten years ago but do they affect us any more? Society has become far more accepting of extreme imagery - perhaps people have become de-sensitized to their impacts as we have become familiar to such images in the news etc. Yet, whilst advertising, particularly for certain sectors (ie. non-profitable uses shocking images, fashion/perfume often exploit sex in order to grab attention) has seen an increase in emotionally-led concepts, advertising has also become more clever, witty and intelligent as it's audiences have become far more aware of it's aims and are more likely to engage with something intelligent, something where they feel rewarded for 'understanding'.
The use of panic to get the attention of the consumer is also worth considering. I think this is becoming more evident as we are living in an increasingly unpredictable environment where people are more cautious, that by panicing an audience, they are more likely to see a product/service as a protection from that fear. It will be interesting to see whether this trend develops.
However, how much further can the industry realistically push it considering the limitations of ASA regulations, public protest and the damage an advertisement that 'goes too far' could potentially have on a company/brand image?
The advertising industry is blamed for the ever increasing problems of society and of the planet. But we live in a consumer culture, audiences obviously respond to the advertising industry because they buy the products/service. I dont think the advertising industry is as big a demon as it is made out to be, it's just part of a far bigger problem. Yes, it encourages consumerism, but there is a demand for it that will never disappear, it's part of our society and yes, it's production processes don't do too much for the environment. But instead of blaming the industry, we could perhaps acknowledge the power it has over people and see it's potential as one of the most powerful ways by which we could begin to instigate change. The key is that the change needs to be because people want to make a difference and improve the lives of future generations, not for a glistening corporate image.
Hmmmm.....its an interesting video from a gentleman with an interesting hairstyle, I think a touch dramatic and exaggerrated perhaps. I agree that yes the advertising industry is not particularly environmentally friendly but not many businesses are. I think now we are steering towards more digital means of communicating an idea/proposal/advert this will perhaps save a fair few trees - however it seems slightly ironic that to create awareness of climate change we are depending on these techniques and materials to communicate the issue. Im with James an Joe.
Not so sure about that video to be honest, just a touch dramatic for my liking. While i acknowledge that advertising is in need of more environmentally friendly restrictions, i don't see the point of imposing further restrictions on an industry intent on pushing boundaries. I think people like this need to look more closely at the ones tearing down the trees than the ones drawing on the paper...
On a lighter note, i did struggle to take this modern day nostradamus seriously when he was sitting in a chair in front of what looked like a pair of curtains.
Who did he say he was, Danny Baker?
P.S. Has anyone seen Garth Marenghi's Darkplace? I couldn't get it out of my head when watching this video...
hehe yeh, now you say it!!!
i find it interesting that it is moving from the cognitive to the emotional, i dont think it will ever be totally one or the other because otherwise it will come to a point where it's all the same and then even the emotional will nt make it through our sensory barriers. To be honest i like the thinking behind ideas, clever ones where you think or have to do a double take. Sex sells, we all knew it, it's just how far it's taken, it is like the subject is still slightly a taboo, moreso in public than down the pub with your friends. With regards to sarah i agree that we are becoming numb to extreme imagery, but would we ten years ago? this shows the change already over a short span of time.
Going green will become a fashion when it suits enough people, i think we do need to recycle more, for ex. in leeds our recycling bins have been taken away and replaced with normal ones, fat lot of help that will do. I think where we can we should go green but at the same time its hard to do t when not many do and you sacrifice things for it, for ex how your printed piece looks and smell on recycled paper.
Advertising is not for long term in the sense that it has to constantly change to suit the market and the product, and as we already bombard people with information then they will be desensitised to long campaigns.
But at the end of the day advertising deos use alot of products and paper etc but there would not be advertising if the companies did not want to get out there and be known, advertising is supply on demand, the whole who came first chicke or egg scenario but the business came first and with it they wanted to be known to be advertised hence the industry, business tycoons have made it what it is. I also agree with sam's comment on restrictions and pushing the boundries, along with the tree cutters.
I watched the video with mixed feelings, but what kept going through my mind is what makes the advertising industry any worse than industry itself. I think we are talking about a lot more than just cutting down trees. The bigger picture is social responsibility as a whole. It's about doing what is morally right and sustaining a healthy environment.
It's a huge can of worms, but I do think there are firms out there who are more responsible than others. Maybe even clients that encourage this in the marketing of their products. Howies is a great example of this. Their attention is turned to the issues that matter. But essentially it's down to individuals to make a difference. Designers of our generation should be questioning their responsibilities on every job they do. We are the future industry.
The fact that people can find an arguement with this guy because of his visual appearance proves his point that advertising is having an increasingly bigger control on the minds of people. Would his point be more valid if Natasha Kaplinsky was reading it instead?
Did anyone see Dumped on channel 4? Sort of the same area, trying to teach society environmental responsibility. Maybe it will work on a certain amount of people, but i think Holly is right being environmentaly friendly will become socially acceptable once it becomes cool. It is no use Leo DiCaprio going on about saving the earth and then jetting round the world on his private plane - we need Kate Moss or JT cycling to work and only doing ad campaigns where the ad companies are environmentally responsible - pretty far fetched i think (at least for the near future). I have touched on sustainable design in one of my blog entries. I have said that i think that sustainable design is the way forward. If enough people do it, the more difference we will make and the more people will follow suit.
The video i think is quite OTT, but i think the underlying principles are right. We as students have the power to change the way that advertising is done. Yes sex sells, but i think we are beyond that now. The majority of us are no longer surprised or moved by shock advertising, solets look to the future to something more moving...
I agree with Jen. There is no doubt that advertising can be very short sighted and simply interested in selling for the moment, but this video is over-dramatic.
I think this is something that has been spoken about for so long it is beginning to loose it's shock impact. Having said that recently there is a whole 'green is the new black' philosophy which is very in vogue. This is encouraging people to look into where their clothes and food come from before they buy them. In that respect its only a matter of time before the public start to demand a more ecologically friendly industry, but until it is the general public and not simply a few individuals calling for change I can't see it happening.
Post a Comment