Re:You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?
by cm2012 on Sunday December 26, 2021 @01:15PM
(#29694836)
Multiply it times a billion. One Banksy is tolerable, a million people graffiting their opinions everywhere would be truly awful. Therefore what Banksy is doing is immoral.
Re:You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?
by bigjimmyjohnson on Sunday December 26, 2021 @03:04PM
(#29695812)
I disagree with the scale multiplier being a metric of morality. If one ice cream truck drives down my street, it puts me in a good mood even if I don't want to buy any ice cream from them. A continuous parade of ice cream trucks would be maddening. But that doesn't mean the ice cream truck driver who actually exists is behaving poorly.
Re:You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?
by xphx on Sunday December 26, 2021 @02:49PM
(#29695668)
One Jesus of Nazareth is tolerable, a million people preaching their opinions everywhere would be truly awful. Therefore what Jesus was doing is immoral.
Re:You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?
by cm2012 on Sunday December 26, 2021 @06:01PM
(#29697203)
A million people do preach opinions today, and did in Jesus' time, it's not horrible.
Re:You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?
by jjulius on Sunday December 26, 2021 @10:56AM
(#29693409)
>I hear you; the copyright case especially shows that he is no paragon of anti-capitalism.
Does it, though? The linked TMZ article suggests the lawsuit was filed by the Los Angeles DA on behalf of the property owner whose property lost value because of the defacement. It doesn't appear that Banksy himself is involved in the lawsuit.
Re:You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?
by kdmccormick on Sunday December 26, 2021 @12:06PM
(#29694121)
The postcard copyright lawsuit, not the vandalism case.
Re:You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?
by jjulius on Sunday December 26, 2021 @01:31PM
(#29695006)
Ah, duh; forgive me for HN'ing while still waking up!
Re:You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?
by yawaworht1978 on Sunday December 26, 2021 @02:17PM
(#29695377)
Do you believe he doesn't have some sort of affiliate manager or pr department managing media and social media presence?
I have never, ever felt like a piece of Banksy's art, or any original piece of visual artwork for that matter, is being shoved down my throat. They're quiet, static, relatively low in number, and easily avoidable & ignorable. I've never felt distracted or distressed because my local coffee shop has a new mural on their wall, and nobody has ever forced me to walk through an art museum in order to get to the grocery store. On the other hand, advertisements are loud, moving, insanely numerous, and totally non-optional. My local subway and subway stations are plastered in advertisements; if I want to transit anywhere, I must endure them.
Plus, the motives are different! Sure, Banksy or $artist_name likely want folks to find their art appealing and then compensate them somehow, via buying copies, commissioning new art, spreading their reputation, whatever. But advertisers do not care if you found their ad appealing; they just want you to buy their product. In fact, many ads are purposely obnoxious or abhorrent just because it's an effective way to bring your attention towards their product. How dystopian is that?
And yes, there's some irony in Banksy, as someone who occasionally benefits from copyright law, to be making this point. But that doesn't make him wrong! And, it'd be far more ironic if, I don't know, Sergey Brin or someone else who use hugely benefited from advertising and copyright law were making the point.