Starbucks, Coca-Cola, Gap....

February 6, 2002 6:36 AM

Starbucks, Coca-Cola, Gap.... If ever there was a candidate for being sued this site would be it... with a three-minute music video setting logos, brand names and glossy corporate imagery against adbusting in-jokes and shots of police brutality. Anti-capitalist anthem or the ultimate in product placement? And how long until the site's namesakes get it pulled off the Web?
posted by skylar (19 comments total)

A few of the companies mentioned will undoubtedly send a "stomp" letter saying that unauthorized use of their brand, logo, identity, likenesses, etc... can't be used. But I don't see anything here that doesn't fall under U.S. Fair Use laws.

I don't see it as an anti-capitalist anthem or the ultimate in product placement. It's merely a statement saying that our culture (Western) is defined by the companies and products we generate or consume.
posted by stevis at 6:48 AM on February 6, 2002

Apart from the fact it'll get pulled in a few minutes (which I believe it will, based on some of the companies used) - its a wicked tune/video...fairplay!
posted by mattr at 6:53 AM on February 6, 2002

nice. very nice.
reminds me of a the the song.

Don't even like it
But you've just gotta try it
You don't even want it
But you're gonna buy
Gonna-gonna-gonna buy it
- swinefever, the the
posted by grabbingsand at 7:16 AM on February 6, 2002

Let me preface by saying that there is no way that there won't be folks offended by the question that I'm about to ask. That said: Is the current overwhelming consumerism really that culturally different than dedication to other icons such as say the Medieval Catholic church or perhaps even more modern examples?

It seems to me that be it Icthus or Crucifix, it's in many ways just another marketing logo. There are a huge number of parallels that can be drawn here particularly when you start making anti-globalization and social justice arguments.
posted by shagoth at 7:24 AM on February 6, 2002

i don't think people will have little chrome starbucks sirens on their hovercars in the year 2525....

if man is still alive, that is....
posted by grabbingsand at 7:37 AM on February 6, 2002

I think in terms of brand recognition, you're spot-on, Shagoth... the cross is a logo, perhaps *the* definitive logo, and a brand with a great deal of meaning behind it. Can you imagine Dracula coiling back in horror at the site of the Nike Swoosh? I don't think so. The Cross is much more powerful.

Many religions have some sort of logo and a whole lot of iconography behind them. But it's what they stand for that counts. What does Marlboro stand for? Ostensibly Marlboro stands for freedom and masculinity. But in real life it stands for cancer, and dedication to Marlboro means bad-smelling clothes. Whatever the sins of the Church (and there are many), to me dedication to religion usually means a whole raft of good things that devotion to consumerism can't offer.
posted by skylar at 7:41 AM on February 6, 2002

While I respect personal spiritualism of all forms, the argument is red herring to the grander scale of similarities between the Church (realizing that Catholicism isn't a monolith)and modern corporatization. It seems to me that on a global cultural basis, the inner sancta and reliquaries are the board rooms. Capitalism is now competing directly with the established religions which makes for an interesting match-up.
posted by shagoth at 8:05 AM on February 6, 2002

Is the current overwhelming consumerism really that culturally different than dedication to other icons such as say the Medieval Catholic church or perhaps even more modern examples?

not really, both are pretty silly.
posted by jcterminal at 8:29 AM on February 6, 2002

I would rather hope capitalism wins. After all, not as many people get killed arguing over their preference for Coke or Pepsi as over Allah/YHWH.
posted by evanizer at 10:01 AM on February 6, 2002

So you're saying that you prefer Pepsi to Coke, then, Evanizer? [fetches gun....]
posted by skylar at 10:07 AM on February 6, 2002

Don't doubt for a moment that if pepsi or coke could polarize people as effectively as religion does that it wouldn't leap at the chance.
Pepsi's wet dream is a jihad for the right cola path on the way to heaven.
posted by dong_resin at 10:21 AM on February 6, 2002

The guy that owns this is a Mefi member. Frankly people's "fears" of brands seems pretty funny/silly to me.
posted by owillis at 10:25 AM on February 6, 2002

I've just hit the saturation point, owillis. I'm choking on dumb ads, shitty profit motive and mindless branding behavior. Everything is push push push. I'm surrounded by pimps offering endless ugly whores.
posted by dong_resin at 10:35 AM on February 6, 2002

So just ignore it. I dunno, maybe because I'm entertained by advertising and have an interest in it, I don't worry too much.
posted by owillis at 10:47 AM on February 6, 2002

I think the dichtomy is guvmint & religion. Guvmint is just the figurehead, corporations wag the tail.

God used to take care of us cradle to grave, we trusted God .. now it's the State. It's all religion.

We're raised to be consumers. That's our place in the great scheme of things.


The children who know how to think for themselves, spoil the harmony of the collective society that is coming, where everyone (would be) interdependent.
- John Dewey, 1899
posted by Mondo at 11:34 AM on February 6, 2002

Can you imagine Dracula coiling back in horror at the site of the Nike Swoosh?

Hey, I like it! That wouldn't make a bad advertising spot right there. "Blah! The man with the wooden stake has superior footwear! Escape will not be mine! Blah!"
posted by youhas at 12:03 PM on February 6, 2002

And what's more, I meant *sight*!
posted by skylar at 1:35 PM on February 6, 2002

You're all confused, the movie is about tuberculosis.
posted by caveday at 1:38 PM on February 6, 2002

Whistling past the graveyard.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:40 AM on February 9, 2002