What makes good art good; and should everyone make art? Banksy answers these questions with great insight and a movie full of hilarity.
This documentary is the Grizzlyman of the art world. Yes it's about street art and actually features footage of Banksy as he tags Gaza and LA alike; but it's really about Thierry Guetta. Also known as Mr. Brainwash, an eccentric (mental) frenchman with a passion for filmming street art.
Thierry was a true ethnographer, he captured everything on film and filled his house with endless boxes of tapes of graffiti artists from Sheppard Fairy to Invader creating their art across the world. He didn't have a plan he just shot. Then the art world started selling Banksy's work at auction houses. He was pissed and knew the time was right to strike back. The problem was Thierry wasn't a documentary filmmaker, he just loved filmming. Thierry took a stab at the film but when Banksy saw Theirry's work he said, "I used to tell everyone to go off and make art; I don't do that anymore."
Now the film get's interesting. Under Banksy's request, Thierry's passion for film turns to street art, but Thierry knows no limits. He hires a team of henchmen and starts producing images for his street art show. The only problem is he hasn't cultivated a style or put any thought into his work, but that doesn't stop the masses from consuming his work. With an endorsement from Banksy and Fairy he transforms into "Mr. Brainswash" and becomes an overnight art sensation clearing over a million on his first gallery opening.
Now the question for me is why were people so quick to assign value to his art? Sheppard got noticed after employing a strategy of recognition equals power. His reputation grew the more people noticed his work, the more it was noticed the more influence and power he gained - his work became a movement based on drawing people's attention to this idea of branding. Banksy has risen by employing a similar strategy - he created thoughtful work riddled with political and cultural overtones. He knows how to express his ideas with wit, tact and creativity - and this film may be his master piece.
At first I was pissed at Thierry for desecrating the art world, in fact I thought Banksy was too; but then I had an idea of what Mr. Brainwash was. He's not an artist, he's part entrepreneur; but more importantly he's a pawn in Banksy's plot for retaliation . The film starts out with an anecdote explaining how Thierry became successful selling vintage fashion. He found a profitable model for buying cheap clothes and marking them up 400%. It worked because people bought it. Well the same was true with his art; but then I thought, what if that was Banksy's plan from the start - after all he did get a lot of investors to spend their money on what has now been outed as superficial art. I couldn't help thinking that this seemed like one sweet victory for a man who has an obsession with almost anything but the bank.
Five well crafted pieces of subtly branded content that makes a good effort to provide a engaging experience instead of jamming another ad down our throats.
Replay Documentary Series: A documentary that re-unites an old highschool rivalry. Well produced and interesting story to develop the Gatorade brand.
Jaime Oliver's Food Revolution: The Nake Chef & ABC pair with Giant Foods to change unhealthy eating behavior
The Gift - A bad ass short strategically placed in a Phillips TV frame.
Nightmares Never Sleep: Nike's branded interactive online game that tests your focus, agility and balance.
Devo Song Study: Listen to samples of the songs from Devo's new album and select 12 of the 16 you want them to include in their new release.
Gareth posted a blog response to an adweek article about measuring viral success, something Faris calls idea multipliers. I like the article and the comments because they tear apart the old school model of advertising that is based on persuasion. It goes hand in hand with the idea that communications firms should be innovating, and calls for the need "to stop using research like drunkards use lampposts - for support, not illumination." For me a brand or product resonates when it's authentic. That means "being immersed in the cultures they want to engage," or "playing a part in adding to or evolving this culture."
Going viral or finding a smart content distribution platform can be important but finding a way to manufacture viral diminishes the authenticity of the message. As online content continues to grow and overtake traditional media I think we'll continue to see brands intertwining themselves in culture so they are part of the experience instead of someone who is just commenting on it.
Well at least the way it's been done for the past 15 years. Here's a little remix of Hoffman Lewis (an SF advertising firm) and Naomi Klein (author of No Logo who is well known for anti-globalism.)
Both have a problem with the same thing. Brand culture and brand strategists have spent the past 10 years creating a world of culture, imagination and personality around a world of collapsing innovation and product development.
As products and services lost momentum advertisers compensated by focusing on the company's brand image. For me, the pinnacle of this movement came in '08 when I was recognized with a Jay/Chiat planning award for help on a campaign that boasted bad marketing for a great product. Although the strategy was considered clever, the irony is that the product was the same old crap the company had been creating for the past 10 years. It was another example of spraying a tan onto another pasty dude at the pool. The spray on brand tan that company's have received over the past decade are wearing off and they are getting exposed for their in-authenticity. Companies must continue to think disruptively but they must also tout an innovative, respectable product.
There is good news though. What is emerging from the rubble is a combination of brand imagination and product innovation; a mixture that has the potential to evolve the way we do and communicate business.
This is a call to action to stop branding the empty cow; if you must, look to the hands of the engineers, the architects, the builders; and find brands that are worthy of communications. But in my mind the real opportunity rests in collaboration. If your clients have a lousy product, don't create a more imaginative world to disguise it; help them build something better.
This is an interesting take on the evolution of branding centered on the idea that a great product markets itself. Akio Morita, a co-founder of Sony is quoted saying "We don't ask consumers what they want. They don't know. Instead we apply our brain power to what they need." What do we do then if you're marketing a product that isn't going to sell itself? What about creating a relationship between the product, the brand and the consumer that are based around additional content that add utility. The main idea around this deck is that modern marketing makes peoples lives better. It got me thinking that the advertiser is responsible for not just making a product look cool but creating experiences that actually make the product better.
Moore’s new book about brandalism is kind of inspiring in the same way Cotton’s Planning For Good is inspiring. There is a real desire for advertising to change for the better.
As a brand strategist I like to be challenged about how I’m contributing to my culture. Moore challenges me to understand what I’m doing and although she wouldn’t agree, there is certainly a middle of the road compromise that can allow for the sale of goods without manipulating the consumer. This includes a two way street that allows art and advertising to contribute positively to culture.
Is the future of branding about driving profits and manipulating a consumer by bluring the line between product and culture? Elizabeth Anne Moore spoke last week in Boston about her book which described the impact that advertising has on our culture. She raised questions about emotional branding and marking concepts like love marking. Moore really gets her boxers in a bunch when she describes the destructive impact of Kevin Robert's Lovemarks, a term to essentially refers to branding through emotional manipulation. Consumers are driven to purchase a product because of what they think it stands for; not because it is a product they need. Her argument challenges advertisers to be authentic and act with integrity – it’s too extreme, even from an advertising perspective.
We value DIY; forefathers like Ian of Dischord records. Dischord was a revolutionary record label that pushed us culturally and made us realize that there are alternatives to selling out. Our generation is stuck between the extremes of selling out and dumpster diving. We’re charged with manufacturing our own culture now and determining to what extent we embrace various marketing techniques. If bad advertising is about pushing a product that people don't really need then how can marketing shift to have a more positive influence on society. Maybe it's about operating with transparency to create trust and destroy the manipulative and deceptive side of advertising. Is it about advertisers promoting culture or being a part of society without trying push their believes on us. Maybe it's about embracing subtlety, about being who you are and letting people recognize they're interested in you. Or maybe it's just about embracing your own inner dumpster diver.
Yesterday Ed Cotton of InfluxInsights hosted The Influx Ideas 2007 Conference. The conference was an opportunity for great minds to converge and discuss the future of branding. There were a few interesting themes that provided insight into how branding is evolving.
- Branding will become more responsible for delivering an emotional experience. "Panasonic embraced an effort to use their technology to create the first battery operated airplane. Communities became passionate about the project and the resulting PR had a tremendous impact on the brand."
- Brands will be expected to provide an all encompassing experience. "Burger King has recently created 3 Xbox games that allows kinds to be entertained while interacting with their brand."
- Brands will be required to deliver genuine value based on what their brand promises. Consumers will seek meaning in what a brand claims. "The Chysler building is a great example of a car company who created an architectural icon that uses their building design to represent the aesthetic of the car."
- Brands must provide transparent sustainability solutions by fundamentally changing practices that are counter intuitive to the green movement. "Those who survive must provide a transparent solution that reveals a commitment to environmental and social responsibility."
- Customization will allow brands to connect with their consumers. An open source approach is important; embracing a consumer's individuality, creativity and ability to innovate makes the consumer feel like the brand is more a part of who they are.
- Brands will be required to communicate with their consumers not just provide communications to them.
We had the opportunity to hear from Jonah Bloom from Ad Age, Scott Wyatt from NBBJ Architects, Sarah Rich from worldchanging.org, Christian Simm from Swiss Next, Kent Nicholas from Ask A Ninja and Gregory Kennedy from Millions of Us. Here's what they had to say:
What makes good art good; and should everyone make art? Banksy answers these questions with great insight and a movie full of hilarity. 
