Eduardo Moises Penalver & Sonia Kaytal Property Outlaws: How Squatters, Pirates, and Protesters Improve the Law of Ownership
Barbara Ehrenreich Dancing in the Streets: A History of Collective Joy
Lewis Hyde The Gift, Creativity and the Artist in the Modern World
Geoffrey Miller Spent: Sex, Evolution, & Consumer Behavior
Thursday, December 8, 2016
NOTES ON FLYPOSTING AND POROUS URBAN SPACE
The last time I was in London I was posting some small works on the street over some pretty nice Fly Posting locations. Halfway through I noticed an older gentleman taking notice and then filming me after he asked if "I was supposed to be doing, what I was doing." I finished my work while he called the cops. I took a few final photographs and then before packing up decided to engage him as he was still idling around the area. This interaction turned out to be one of the more bizarre and interesting street moments I have had yet. Turns out the person I was talking to was at one time a Fly Poster himself, operating illegally to cover the streets in commercial posters, and also a professor who had thought plenty about the streets of his city and what kinds of policy, be it formal or informal, makes for a vibrant and engaging public environment.
We exchanged information and the man who would have had me arrested has become a bit of a friend as we email back and forth and try to get to the heart of the matter. The heart of the matter to me is that today this man operates Flying Leaps, a company that makes "art" posters which are illegally placed on the street next to illegal advertising and which can be bought online. To me they are simple advertising that hides behind a more altruistic vision, but advertising nonetheless. To him they are an attempt to use public space in the participatory manner that all Fly Posters agree to, and which street artists and graffiti artists prescribe.
Take a look at his essay on the topic below as it is well worth the read and makes an interesting point that is often overlooked and that I did not expect to be made by an advertiser them self. The streets are becoming less and less accessible, even to the advertisers that once used them, as multinationals control more of our lives, including what we see on our way to work.
In this age of immateriality, as mobile phone apps and e-mail blasts add new marketing potentials undreamed of in the […] [19th century], it may seem curious to look at posters as a distinct form. But posters’ format provides a snapshot of broader epochal transition. To be sure, posters are no longer the darlings of most modern advertisers, but they have hardly died away. Indeed, how and when they are deployed becomes all the more interesting. When Apple iPod was launched, the company chose a poster campaign, presenting silhouettes of listeners dancing against backgrounds of screaming, saturated colour, to convey the physicality and sensory depth of the iPod experience. Even – perhaps especially – in a digital age, the materiality and life of a poster can maintain a powerful hold on us.
Advertising Shits In Your Head combines theory and practice in one short book about the modern subvertising movement. Featuring: Public Ad Campaign, Brandalism, Special Patrol Group and Dr. D.
Expected delivery: January 2017
Read a sample chapter: Advertising Shits in Your Head - Chapter 1
Advance praise for Advertising Shits In Your Head:
“Have you ever stopped to wonder why you know so much about things you are not interested in: brands, products, courses, colleges, holidays you might take, clothes you should wear? You may think yourself immune, but advertising is subliminal. You might ignore the Facebook posts that are ‘sponsored’, the animated billboards, and you may always skip the adverts as fast as you can. But to ignore them you first had to recognise them for what they were. And even in that small instance of time a logo has seeped into your subconscious. If advertising didn’t hit the target it would not be made. You are the target." – Danny Dorling (Author)
"Advertising Shits In Your Head provides a history of the practice (going back to the early 70s), alarming research and theory on the effects of the industry, advice about how to take part (including legal information) as well as several stunning case studies. This is essential reading for all who want to fight back against 'the most powerful and sustained system of propaganda in human history'.” – Jamie Kelsey-Fry (Contributing-Editor, New Internationalist)
"Advertising Shits In Your Head concisely describes, through unique first-hand accounts, the range of concerns adressed by today's subvertising community. From a right to the city argument, to the belief that advertising is the biggest obstacle to avoiding catastrophic climate change, Advertising Shits In Your Head envisions a movement looking far beyond culture jamming and corporate identity sabotage." – Jordan Seiler (Public Ad Campaign)
"Advertising Shits in Your Head gives form and context to culture jamming practices in the 21st Century. It is an important contribution on the path to realising the possibilities of creative practice as a vehicle for social change. Providing important theoretical and historical context that unites the twin strands of activism – creativity and resistance – it shows how creative minds are getting together in the age of digital networks to hack space and place, and challenge the presence of capitalist values within our public, private and cultural spaces. Advertisers most definitely shit in your head: this book is here to stop them." – Bill Posters (Brandalism)
"Advertising is a gigantic machine for creating human misery. It's a sustained psychological assault on the population and it is hard to overstate the brutal and permanent damage it does to us as individuals, to society, and to the planet itself. This book is a manual on how to begin the process of dismantling the machinery of advertising: how to interrupt it, sabotage it and one day, maybe, destroy it entirely." – Darren Cullen (Spelling Mistakes Cost Lives)
"Once advertising has shit in your head, you're going to need something to clean it up with; I couldn't recommend this book more highly." – Dr. D
Subway Therapy Project Returning Public Space to its Utopic Potential
Be it graffiti, street art, public art, or just plain scrawl, the need to mark and make meaning in public space is intrinsic to its proper function for both the individual and the collective. By monopolizing the walls of our city, and normalizing commercial discourse over public interests, advertising erodes our ability, desire, and right to use public space in meaningful and impactful ways. The Subway Therapy project at Union Square is a fine example of necessity overcoming expectation, and of public space returning to its utopic potential. More info about the Subway Therapy project [HERE]
Simple, effective and always on point. As funny as this piece is for a chuckle and a nod, this is pretty serious on a fundamental level. When we privilege one type of communication over another we are making a collective decision about our priorities and ultimately our desires for our future selves. As of right now, we got it all fucked up and Mobstr knows it.
In 2014, 63 participants took to the streets and more than 300 advertisements were removed, and we want to keep that momentum goring. We hope that you will join us in this third year again!
The task is easy, go out on November 27th and remove as many advertisements as you can.
Don't forget to take a photograph of the empty bus shelter, phone booth, billboard, or whatever type of advertisement you have chosen to liberate. Share this image with the rest of us by posting it to Facebook, sending it directly to the NOAD email, or sharing it on social media with the hashtag #NOADday.
WHAT IS NOAD Day?
NOAD Day is an ongoing civil disobedience project begun in 2014 as an expression of global resistance to the use of our shared public spaces for advertising and commercial media. The goal of the project is to create a global voice of dissatisfaction against the use of our public spaces for a commercial media that is a detriment to our collective psyche. The more participation we have, the greater our voice, so take a minute this November 27th to join the party.
November 27th (anytime)
Anyone who thinks actively in what’s a democratic public space, whether adbusters, activists, artists, graffiti writers, street artists, sociologists, philosophers...
To reduce the impact of advertising. To question the lack of decision of the citizens in terms of the configuration of the public space
—which belongs to us— and to reduce the mental/visual pollution that we are daily exposed to. On November 28/29 the “Buy Nothing Day” is celebrated by the people all around the world. The “BND” was a Project promoted by Adbusters magazine, where the participants avoid buying during 24 hours.
The idea of making our Project one day before “BND” is a poetical way to reduce the impact of advertising on the buying decision of the citizens.
For those who don’t have a key, we made a tutorial on how to make your own key.
You can watch it here.
If this one is not working in your city or you prefer to buy other keys you can do it here.
One of the most important things we can do to address the egregious use of our public space to stoke the fires of consumerism, while undermining our individual and community well being, and monopolizing an important space for public discourse, through the proliferation of outdoor advertising imagery, is to talk about it, think about it, and write about it so that more people begin to understand the profound ways in which it is both a cause and a symptom of many of the problems our collectivity faces today. While I may have chosen another title for the book, Advertising Shits In Your Head, is an important addition to the small collection of literature around this very important public topic. And when it really comes down to it, the book title really is just the honest truth.
Please take the time to visit the crowdfunder campaign and donate even a small amount of money to help cover the printing costs of this non-for-profit publication and publisher.
"Advertising Shits In Your Head combines theory and practice in one short book about the modern subvertising movement. Featuring: Public Ad Campaign, Brandalism, Special Patrol Group and Dr. D. Dog Section Press is a not-for-profit publisher and all of our publications are printed with Calverts, a workers' co-operative."
The artist-led For Freedoms super PAC has erected a billboard on Highway 80 outside Pearl, Mississippi that features President-Elect Donald J. Trump’s slogan “Make American Great Again” atop a well-known Civil Rights-era photograph by Spider Martin of a confrontation on the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama. More [HERE]
I just got an email from the TIA and I have to be honest, I wasnt aware of thier work. This adds to the list of early billboard alteration teams like the Billboard Liberation Front, B.U.G.A.U.P, Ron English (whose work has gone off the deep end by wrapping around and eating it's own tail), and The CDC. Take a look and brush up on history.
You are invited to visit an exhibit of some of the finest billboard alterations you have ever seen. Here's one:
These billboards appeared on the streets of Santa Cruz, California, from 1980 to 1985. The billboards were made over by a clandestine network of midnight billboard editors operating under the name of Truth In Advertising, or TIA for short.
This exhibit of their historic work was first presented in 2007 at the Santa Cruz Museum of Art and History. Now for the first time the exhibit is available on the web. It's made up of 12 billboards presented in the order in which they appeared on the streets of Santa Cruz. The sequence also tells the story of Truth in Advertising, and documents publicity and commentary. More [HERE]
Advertising on Public Buildings Is a Sad, Terrible Thing
This little rant by Jared Brey is one of the most succinct and compelling arguments against outdoor advertising, particularly on municipal infrastructure, that I have ever read. The quote below is so good I had to put it directly into this post but read the rest of the article for more interesting observations about why advertising on municipal buildings is a terrible fucking idea!
Two, this proposal will supposedly generate “up to $500,000” a year, which is a glass-half-full way of saying it will generate less than $500,000 a year. Half a million dollars is no pittance, of course, and in a poor city like Philadelphia, every penny helps. But $500,000 is just 0.0125 percent of the $4 billion municipal budget. For comparison’s sake, that same portion of the $41,233 median income in Philadelphia is just five dollars and 15 cents. If someone asked you to hang a billboard on your front door and promised you “up to” $5.15 a year in return, what would you say? I know what I’d say: Get right the fuck out of here, please, sir. Read more [HERE]
Google Translation -
"In Brussels yesterday, 80 billboard boxes were screened in the public space and the advertising contents were exchanged by posters of 20 Belgian and international artists. With the 'Brand Washing 'protesting the makers behind the action against the planned FTA TTIP and CETA . There is the additional power increase of large global corporations such as McDonalds, Chevron or Texaco fears have referred to the number of artists in their protest designs." More [HERE]
Although Los Angeles has had its battles over supergraphics—those painted on advertisements that often stretch multiple stories on a building's facade—the billboard as a concept has received substantially less attention, unless the provocative imagery on it causes fender benders. However, Tom Wiscombe's proposal for digital, vertically aligned, two-sided billboards that allow people to walk inside of them injects new life into an otherwise sleepy structure, making them less car-centric and more about public space. More [HERE]
A few months ago I was given the chance to comment on the visual gentrification that has been transforming Bushwick for some years for a documentary called No Free Walls that just came out. In addition to the on camera interview, I did a little phone conversation a few days ago for the Complex website. Take a look below.
Watch the full documentary [HERE] Read the whole interview [HERE]
The giant E Ink displays, developed by Mercedes-Benz, Visonect, and RoadAds Interactive, are actually each made up of four 32-inch E Ink screens that are synced to function as a single three-by-five-feet display with a resolution of 1440 x 2560 pixels and 16-levels of grayscale. More [HERE]
All the ads in this London subway station are gone ... and replaced with cats
When you pay the advertising company to replace ads with art or other public messaging you are reinforcing the belief that public space should be bought and sold to the highest bidder. I love this idea but I hate that it doesn't demand more.
Charlie Todd of the infamous Improve Everywhere sent me some photos over the weekend of planes flying over the beach, in formation, to advertise Citibank services. He explained that he decided to craft the message after the final straw was drawn in the form of a giant LED billboard on the back of a boat, patrolling the coastline. We both rallied behind a "is there no place sacred" argument and went about our routine until he sent me these images yesterday from 27th and 7th avenue.
Who the fuck knows what marketing genius cooked up this doozy but it had to be someone from NYC that understands a pedestrians uniquely close relationship with the giant street level billboards operated by Contest Promotions, or whatever damn company has swallowed Contest Promotions in an effort to keep what was once an illegal business alive and well. Using what I can only describe as a physical tactic that is highly reminiscent of a few NYSAT pieces, this J-Crew ad acknowledges its "artistic" inspiration while gleefully engaging in full on viral marketing hashtag nonsense. Commercial media, and consumerist culture are a leach on society and a thief of creativity from the products created to the ways in which they are advertised.
MEXICO CITY — A piece of art that arrives plastered on a billboard might understandably be considered an attempt to strike a blow against the cultural status quo. The format, oversized and egotistical by nature, is a showy delivery system no matter how you look at it, a loud scream set in opposition to a gallery world where everyone converses in careful whispers. More [HERE]
A Brief Look At Why I Remove And Replace Outdoor Advertising
People often ask me why I do ad-takeovers and promote similar civil disobedience amongst my peers. The simple answer is that I believe ingesting too much commercial media (advertising) makes it harder for us to be mindful conscientious citizens, and anything we can do to make our personal and collective behavior better is a step in the right direction to achieving a more just and equitable world. This belief is supported by scientific research into advertising’s psychological impact on the individual, along with the resulting behavioral challenges it creates for us socially, but which is beyond the scope of this essay.
Buried right below the surface of that “why” question is another, and that is what task is accomplished by your ad-takeover work? What wrong is being righted by removing or replacing outdoor ads? And ultimately, will or could ad-takeover work ever result in real social change? I believe the answer is yes, which is why I continue use it as the main focus of my artistic project.
Advertising aggression and the desired city:
Advertising is the promotion and dissemination of messages whose primary interest is to convince you to align yourself with the advertisers agenda. Often this is the purchase of a product or service, which gives the entire affair a somewhat nefarious atmosphere as the practitioners work to persuade you to their ends.
For this reason most of us are skeptical of advertising and its goals, particularly those of us who see the economic and environmental issues that our society faces, in large part due to the rampant consumerism fueled by advertising itself. Many of us also deride advertising for the social and psychological impact it has on us by preying on our insecurities or appealing to our own self-interest. Even when advertising is at its best and masquerades its activities as a gentle nudge, we see its intention with the clarity offered by the inescapable truth that it is out to change our minds.
Because of this, we all seem to intuit that the form itself is to be avoided and when asked about a more conscientious media environment, that the individual advertising tactics are irrelevant. More often than not we seek to avoid the pressure placed on us by advertising.
And yet an increasing number of our cities are offering more and more space to these messages. Today, this situation seems inevitable because so many of us have grown up in cities surrounded by commercial media, and to question it seems like a fanciful dalliance towards a dead end. We sit by and watch as billboards and placards have given way to a vast infrastructure on which outdoor advertising resides including our buses(inside and outside)-bus stops-subways-subway stations-subway platforms-subway entrances-subway fare cards-taxi cabs(inside and outside)-pedicabs-trolleys-airports-freestanding placards-building facades-sidewalks-construction hoardings-wall wraps-pop up marketing events, etc. etc. Even the skies are written on in the summer months in New York.
The deep saturation of our public environments with commercial media is written into the language and strategies employed by the industry itself, offering “station domination” campaigns to compete in already heavily media saturated environments. The fact of the matter is that navigating public space in our cities involves interacting with large amounts of commercial advertising.
As a lifelong city resident, this obvious schism between individual desire and how cities are currently practiced is difficult to swallow. It seems to defy the idealistic utopian logic of cities that I fondly invoke when I dare to dream of cities at their best; the one in which our collective will sets the groundwork upon which our cities forms and function are determined. Even my practical understanding of cities doesn’t seem to jive with the idea that what we seek to avoid, would be thrust upon us.
The obvious reason for this discrepancy between the desired city and the actual city is that there is a lot of money being made on advertising content, and more importantly on the spaces that it occupies. Like so many aspects of our lives, the public environment itself has been monetized, and it would appear against our better judgment. As unfair as that might seem, this impropriety pales in comparison to the fact that the money being made through the sale of our shared public resource is done so by selling you and your attention to companies intent on capturing it.
Your eyes are worth money and unwittingly you have become a product being bought and sold between commercial media companies and the businesses that they sell your public environment to. When looked at so plainly it doesn’t make sense to me that there would be advertising in public space at all for the simple reason that it uses a personal resource, to do something against our collective will, in order to benefit someone else.
The false justification for outdoor advertising:
The prevailing logic behind advertising (and why we allow our cities formal arrangement to defy common sense) is that it pays for something we want in return for the nuisance of being distracted for someone else’s purpose. Public space adheres to this same logic and we are asked to believe that advertising is an integral part of maintaining our cities infrastructure.
While advertising revenue is significant, the idea that advertising is a necessary evil we must endure in order to keep our trains running falls apart under closer scrutiny. Immense profits are extracted from our cities by out of home media giants like JCDecaux that defy the assumption advertising is anything more than a way to turn the city into a profitable venture. If advertising were truly intent on nourishing underfunded public good, we would see to it that all of the profits were invested back into our city, and this is simply not the case.
Instead, the city is auctioned off and deals are made on our behalf to share portions of the revenue made from the attention we didn’t want to put on offer in the first place. So comfortable have we become with this inequitable deal that we have given up on the simple expectation of reciprocation from advertising, fully conceding that advertisings presence is just a part of modern life.
Illegal advertising, ephemeral marketing, brand engagement events, and a spectacular array of advertising techniques that fly under the radar of public policies attempting to capture small portions of public advertising revenue, run rampant in our cities. The premise that advertising should be endured because it provides a public service is simply false.
An informed critical response:
So I go out and remove ads without thought to the legality of my actions, but with an understanding of their justness when perceived from a practical perspective. I do so because like so many other forms of civil disobedience aimed at private property, it calls attention to an aspect of society that I think warrants closer inspection, but which is difficult to approach through more traditional channels of democracy.
Given my concerns about the effects of advertising on our ability to fully live as mindful conscientious citizens, which is borne out in social and psychological research, addressing the issue in a way that will result in advertisings removal, is my top priority. I have chosen to do so through civil disobedience, but there are more traditional methods available that I have forsaken and a brief explanation of why is important to answer if we want to get to the heart of what good comes of ad-takeover work.
Like many cities, New York controls the proliferation of outdoor advertising by permitting both the companies that operate outdoor advertising businesses, as well as the individual signs when applicable. This allows cities to keep some semblance of control over public space, while demanding revenue in the form of contractual agreements and yearly fees.
In 2009 I became aware that the NYC Department of Buildings had put its records online in an easily searchable database. This allowed me to look up the legality of many of the signs that looked down on our streets and to eventually realize that a company called NPA City Outdoor was operating hundreds of locations without permits, and therefore illegally. I began the painstaking process of calling the DOB Sign Enforcement Unit, tasked with policing outdoor advertising offenses, to report the illegal signage as I came upon it.
This exhaustive and lengthy process began to turn the slow wheels of justice and I watched as violations and fines were levied against each offending location. The problem was that none of the signs came down and it became clear to me that the city itself was not prepared to take on the legal might of a business with the deep pockets afforded by advertising revenue. Legal channels alone were simply not enough to combat this problem.
I then organized a large-scale civil disobedience project called NYSAT that would illegally, but very publicly, condemn the company by bringing out hundreds of citizens to whitewash all of their billboards and replace the imagery with public artworks. It was hoped that through media attention and a little bit of embarrassment, we could grease the wheels of justice and set in motion a series of events that would eventually lead to the actual removal of the illegal signs and the company operating them.
This is exactly what happened and I watched with excitement as NPA City Outdoor began a five-year battle with New York that they would eventually lose. Addressing legal advertising with these same tactics would be harder, but it seemed that prompted by a little civilian led direct action, the legal structures we had in place could actually reign in advertising and begin to remove advertising from public space entirely.
I don’t believe I could have been more wrong. Within a year of NPA loosing their court battles and removing most of their signs from the streets of NYC, their advertising tactics were tweaked and they began operating in the city once again. It was at this point that I came to realize that the profits for advertising were too great to maintain any real enforcement of the publics will. In fact, cities themselves were helpless despite strict rules and regulations; only a full change in public opinion towards advertising in public space would result in the changes I wanted to see.
So I returned to my tactics of removing advertising from public space without permission and attempting to promote similar civil disobedience amongst my peers. I did so less because I thought that this was the road to full removal of advertising from public space, than because it was all I had left.
Though it would appear disheartening, I quickly realized that my goal when doing ad-takeover work should not be to remove the ads themselves but to question the medium more generally. What we are doing when we do ad-takeover work is not righting any wrong, but using the medium itself to question its perceived authority in the hopes that those watching will think more deeply about the schism between what they want and what they see in front of their eyes.
In fact, to say this is accomplished through individual advertising takeovers is a little bit of self deception as most advertising takeovers go unnoticed. What we are truly trying to accomplish when we do advertising takeovers is change public opinion, and that task is done through personification and our lived experience. Like most civil disobedience against private property, my continued disregard for outdoor advertising in general and the rules that govern right and wrong in relation to it, allows me to be a focal point upon which the issue can be discussed more deeply.
Through discussion comes understanding, and through understanding comes belief, and what I believe is that cities can be better.
The millions of people who follow Kim Kardashian West and her sisters on social media have become accustomed to seeing them praise everything from fat-burning tea to gummy vitamins for healthier hair. More [HERE]
Jake Blaschka Is Doing Some Great Work That You Should See
Jake Blaschka just reached out to me regarding keys for a certain city he may be visiting in the not too distant future. It turns out he has been working with outdoor advertising in some pretty fantastic ways and I am only finding out about it now. Considering the last post, I think it's clear I am not doing my research.
The always wonderful Luna Park just turned me on to Parzival's work, and I am surprised I haven't seen it before. Take a full look at his website to fully realize the lifelong insanity. I absolutely love it. More [HERE]
The conclusion of this article may or may not apply more broadly, but I can't imagine that being surrounded by imagery that asks us to reflect on our own personal needs and interests, we do not forgo some of our capacity to think about others.
"In short, when young women are prompted to reflect on their physical appearance, they seem to lose intellectual focus."
Thomas Dekeyser wrote a nice blog post on Robert Montgomery's work that I think does a good job of navigating his desire for subvertising work to always be illegal in order to retain the most powerful critique of capitalism and the systems that help to perpetuate it. Montgomery's work isnt always illegal and yet it is incredibly powerful so parsing these two thing out isn't easy when you want to see the world in black and white. Well worth a read as Dekeyser is becoming one of my favorite thinkers on this topic.
Last week I went to hear Robert Montgomery speak at The Art Conference. I’ve been reaching out to him for a while now, trying to arrange a conversation, without luck, so I was excited to finally hear one of my favourite subvertising practitioners elaborate on his practice and related politics. More [HERE]
I just got back from London where Tina Ziegler held the first TAC (The Art Conference) in a beautiful old factory venue called the Ugly Duck. I was asked to open two days of pretty intense talks about Art, Technology, and social engagement. I took the task seriously and used my work to show how advertising, as one of the sub genre's of cultural production systems, undermines social progress by monopolizing the systems of dissemination, prohibiting access and participation, economically driving technological determinism, and framing our cultural values in frighteningly self serving ways. It all went pretty well despite not having a podium to put my papers on. Given the chance to do it again I plan to do a little more memorization, and to attempt to go beyond advertising to Art itself, which has its own way of slowing social progress in ways which are similar to advertising itself.
Notable speakers from the conference were RJ Rushmore who's talk From Dissidence to Decorative derided projects like Urban Nation as decorative city wallpaper intent on raising property value more than providing any of the real radical politics once prescribed to street art. As a nice opposition to that, Teresa Latuszewska spoke about the Urban Forms mural project in Lodz Poland which is a sanctioned mural project but one that works hard to reach out to the community and integrate itself deep into the skin of the city. They have also done some pretty boring and thankless work gathering hard statistics on peoples feelings towards the individual murals and the culture in general. Mia Grundahl spoke about Women on Walls which I knew little about and which practically brought me to tears. To say that these projects proved RJ's point would be an understatement.
Similarly heartbreaking and inspirational was the work of Robert Montgomery whose texts can often be found on the street where advertising once broadcast its messages loudly. Robert has taken over billboards illegally, but he has also worked directly with the OOH companies to place his work. At first I was upset that he would collaborate with the enemy, but after speaking with him and hearing him talk, I realized that my radical politics was less important to him than ensuring there was an alternative voice to the aggressive commercial megaphone we are often confronted with on a daily basis. His writing, a sort of haunting conversation with the city and capitalism, draws a beautiful contrast that works to undermine consumerist propaganda. While I surely like his illegal pieces better, I cannot say that the sanctioned pieces are less effective to someone who doesn't know the politics behind anti ad activity. And finally Dan Witz took me on a nostalgic trip back to his earliest work that began in 1978 a year before I was born. That guy has been doing groundbreaking street art before the term was coined, hell even before graf made its mark. A true pioneer.
All in all it was a fantastic event and I look forward to the next. If you have an opportunity to visit one yourself, I highly suggest taking the time.
A quick installation on Commercial street, London
The incredible force behind TAC01 Tina Ziegler
The crowd at the first TAC
Talking to Dan Witz about staying the course and privilege
Speaking about how advertising undermines social progress
Speaking about how advertising undermines social progress
While I definitely think there are some additions to this Anti-Advertising history, I was super happy to be included in the timeline. The fact of the mater is that despite the growth of advertising alongside the rise of global capitalism, there is a strong resistance being mounted from artists and academics alike that see it as an important battleground for addressing the rampant pillaging of our planet and the de-evolution of our critical public discourse.