advertising vs. art

yes, it has been some time since i've written here. i haven't felt like it. some explanations in life are simple. i suppose i just haven't had all that much to say lately. that said (no pun intended) below is an interview i just did for a magazine called wonka vision. back when keri was embroiled in this "ad-free blog" discussion, i was out of breath. too much recording, and filming, and waiting (to hear from grad school, to which i was accepted but that is indeed another piece of writing) too much piano practice, and so on. i had a river of thoughts but no interest in sharing. anyway, i'm not sure when the article comes out, but i just figured i'd put it here for you all to read. it should be fairly self-explanatory.

I know this sounds like a simple question, but: "Where did the idea
for 'Ad Free Blog' come from?

While this question could certainly necessitate a book length answer, I will (attempt to) be brief…I have for many years had a problem with the increasing amount of advertisement in western (more specifically North American) culture. We live in a world that (sadly) is driven by money, and the accumulation of great amounts of wealth, rather than the equal distribution of resources. Because of this, and because of a general sense of apathy amongst most people (myself at times included in this group) it has led to a rampant increase in the amount of advertising that we are subjected to.

This of course causes many problems in my opinion, as several things happen: first, our public (and sometimes what I would define as private) space is “corrupted” by advertising, which in turn “corrupts” our mental space. Everything from billboards, to ads on cars, to ads on grocery store conveyer belt dividers, to ads above urinals, etc. illustrate ways in which the advertising industry has invaded our space. Secondly, the degree to which advertising has become prevalent, leaves us little chance to find new things for ourselves; which on some very base spiritual level devalues our experience in life. Part of what is beautiful about being a child, or traveling to a new and unknown place is the extent to which that “world” is an unexplored place for us to research. Frankly, the amount of advertising that exists today, combined with a general laziness on the part of our culture, means that most people have stopped making many of these decisions for themselves, and instead rely on these large, very impersonal corporations to make decisions for them. In other words, people are making uninformed decisions, based on what advertisers are telling them.

In terms of advertising on blogs themselves, Keri Smith (my wife) and I were frustrated that yet another territory was being inundated with corporate (or at least money-making) interests. We wanted to create a way for “bloggers” to make clear which side of the line they stand on.

One of the beliefs of 'Ad Free Blog' is that corporate advertising
devalues the medium; the question I've heard from many is: "How can it
be devaluing the medium if anybody can have one and write about any
inane information they choose?" Your thoughts?

I would be the first to argue that the greatest majority of blog writing is mediocre at best. I find it important that we see “blogging” for what it is, namely the making public of a personal journal or detail of events, or ideas, etc. as opposed to the assumption that there is now an endless sea of great writers. That said, blogging is becoming a new form of media. As a musician, I could compare this to the simple fact that anyone could conceivably spend about $500.00 on a guitar and some simple recording equipment then write, record, and post their songs on myspace. Does this make them a competent or good musician? Definitely not. But that said, the medium and what exists in terms of content on the medium are two different things. Advertisements wouldn’t necessarily devalue the writing on blogs, but the medium itself. Does that make sense?

Personally, I don’t really understand the difficulty in grasping this: if large corporations are paying you $10,000.00 a month to advertise their products on your blog, wouldn’t you (the author of the blog) feel nervous about writing derogatory things about said companies? I certainly would. Keri for example has been offered money to write positive things about products from companies. At some point, as a reader of her blog, I would begin to distrust all that she says. Is she writing about these things because she really likes them, or because someone is paying her to say that she likes them? In some way, I think we need to recognize that while most blogs may be inane or poorly written or both, this medium is becoming a new way of sharing information, which is ultimately a much less wealthy form of media. I could cite countless examples wherein media outlets have denied certain advertisers the right to run ads in their magazine, newspaper, etc. for fear of upsetting other (monetary) contributors. They usually pass this off as a “conflict of interest,” which is bullshit. This is precisely the reason that Adbusters began as a publication. The sentiment that this does Not devalue the medium seems a naïve and illogical argument.

What do you make of the controversy surrounding this?

The controversy actually surprised me…I imagined that people would generally agree with us. Perhaps that was naive, but I tend to figure that at this point in the history of post-modern culture, most people will recognize that advertising generally devalues any medium. The statement that it doesn’t, is like stating that politician “X” taking five hundred thousand dollars from company “Y” will not effect “X’s” decision making in any way. I just think it is an unrealistic way of looking at culture. Ultimately, I’ve been saddened by the fact that so many people say that advertising doesn’t effect or bother them. Shouldn’t the simple fact that I can get on an airplane, fly to New York (from California) and shop at all of the same stores, suggest that our “global” economy, which is responsible for the majority of advertising, be disturbing to people? What has happened to our local economies and cultures? Isn’t the homogeneity of America bothersome to people, or are they so afraid of new things and change that they want the world to be as predictable as possible? I’m afraid I may have drifted a bit there…while I’m glad to see so many people discussing this (I think intelligent, informed debate is terribly important in keeping culture alive) I’m saddened by the amount of people that say they just don’t care.

Does the fact that Blogger (www.blogger.com) is owned by Google and
MySpace is owned by NewsCorp bother you?

Yes. But this is a slippery slope. It is terribly difficult in today’s world to support only companies that one believes in. My concerns are many, but among them is the issue of content control. I personally find it reprehensible that Blockbuster feels like they should have the authority to edit films they find “inappropriate.” It is precisely this way of thinking that I believe leads to the oppression of certain peoples. If they can “edit the content” how they see fit, then they can turn certain groups of people into the “other,” and therefore justify oppressing them. This may seem like a stretch (and in some way it is) but the problem is, that it evokes a certain framework of thought, or protocol if you will. I am ultimately concerned that myspace or blogger will also begin to “edit content.” Which in some cases they already do.

Let's face it; there are some really talented bloggers out there, that
deserve to be in print, for that matter. Why not try and make some
money off of a low-cost application such as a blog?

I see your point here, and as an artist I agree theoretically. In some way, my entire argument is a moot point, as I’m sure much of the publishing industry is completely corrupt too. But I still stand behind the fact that the medium is being devalued.

In the end though, these are simply my (and my wife’s and others’) opinions. This is a personal decision. While I certainly have a great problem with advertising in general, and especially with regard to the great increase of advertising, whether or not one advertises on their blog to make money is their own decision. Keri and I simply wanted to create a way for people to make clear that they do not accept advertising for their blogs, so that the readers can know that the content is not effected in any way by money. If I write that I have found a new favorite ice cream, it isn’t because that ice cream company is paying me to write that, it is because I think it tastes good. Personally, I have made very little money as an artist, but I have to decide if my conscience can deal with making money as an artist in that way. My decision is no, and others’ is yes. As much as it frustrates me that another of the artists’ mediums in being “bought out” by Corporate America, I must simply make decisions based on my belief system, and hope that some artists out there will agree. If nothing else, it is of immeasurable importance that we have some convictions as artists. At least in this way, we give the readers an informed choice. Keri and I both perceive our blogs as extensions of ourselves, and our art, which makes this a terribly personal choice. While it frustrates me that so many talented artists go unnoticed, and some of them in then end make their money in this way, I do my best to understand. I guess in the end it just isn’t my choice.

Posted by jeff pitcher at April 14, 2006 01:17 PM

....................................