I would not be reading Adbusters, I’d be emigrating, or going up to the hills to live in a shack where there are no ads, no TV, no magazines, no billboards: only the sky and the earth. And if I could not do that physically, I would do it spiritually.

This is exactly the right response, and the only response. Most readers of PopOcculture are probably already on board with it, but the vast American public — in particular the left/liberal wing of it — are ignorant or hostile to any kind of spiritual solution. Unfortunately, there is nowhere to emigrate physically, and the “simple life” of living in the hills is an option only if you already have a lot of cash on hand. For the middle and lower classes, we can only escape spiritually. This requires work and difficult choices, neither of which Americans are used to or like. And it requires a kind of faith, which has been bled out of the American left.

The idea (which I think has a lot of merit) is that the corperate logos are fetishized and consumed and the black spot campaign is an effort to resist that in some way.

The thing that makes that argument fall flat is that the black spot merely serves as a new idol to fetishize. For chrissake, these people are SELLING shoes with a black dot on them!! The intention here is clearly less about subverting accepted symbols but co-opting them.

While the “overarching goal” that is stated on the site is really neat n’ all, the problem is — they are still trying to make sneakers cool. They are *just* trying to make black dots the new swoosh, and they know full well that they’ll fail. Nobody’s perceptions about footwear and identity will change with this approach. I’m as big a fan of hemp made, fair trade, branded vegan shitkickers as you are… but I just can’t buy this. Don’t try to sell me a fake DIY product or I’ll hate you more than Nike.

As Tim said: Any press is good press. Remember when that “Supersize Me” movie came out? It was perfectly coordinated with McDonalds new healthy meal campaign. Problem? Solution! All this Adbusters crap is just a way to stroke people who think they are above marketing and then marketing to them. It’s brilliant… Problem? Solution!

Why don’t you call out Sports Illustrated for not going after the issues that are more important than sports??

Because Sports Illustrated has not set itself up as a morally superior adversary in a spiritual battle against the “Anti-Sports” world?

Im still struck by the copywrite infringement deal. how could they get away with that?

What is going on the Calvin Kline ad anyway? Two guys and a girl? A rather taboo subject, and Key pointed out that by suggesting through the pictures something that is a repressed desire is a way of opening the viewer to accept other subliminals in the ad. Consciously, one may feel disgusted by what it covertly suggests, and so, one denies what one perceives. (defense mechanism)

Anyway, is this text laid over the still existing subliminal going to have any effect other than to reinforce the denial mechanism?

Of course Key’s books were met by VERY angry denials by the ad industry, along with accusations of a dirty mind, blah blah…

Also the point of the black spot campaign is meant to disrupt the perpetuation of the image of corperate products. The idea (which I think has a lot of merit) is that the corperate logos are fetishized and consumed and the black spot campaign is an effort to resist that in some way. I think they’re only using nike as an example but it’s something that can be done with any kind of shoes or other item bearing a prominant corperate logo (obviously). And also the use of Nike as an example shows an understanding that there doesn’t have to be some expectation of purity among participants who choose to resist this ‘branding’

Also it’s stupid to criticize Adbusters for not going after the most important issues in the world. There are other social issues (which ones are most important is a matter of personal perspective) there are also other magazines, and it’s the perogative of each publication to choose their subject matter. Why don’t you call out Sports Illustrated for not going after the issues that are more important than sports??

Let me try to explain. Reading Adbusters - not a magazine I am familiar with, because I am in England - is evidence of being within the very goldfish bowl one is trying to escape. Who is it intended for? I’m putting myself putatively in your place and thinking I would not be reading Adbusters, I’d be emigrating, or going up to the hills to live in a shack where there are no ads, no TV, no magazines, no billboards: only the sky and the earth. And if I could not do that physically, I would do it spiritually.

In any event I would be establishing by the way I live my life that though the advertisers and politicians and corporations need me, I don’t need them, not even the magazines which purport to subvert the established order. And by living in this way, which more or less I do, I act as role model to anyone else who’s ready to follow suit.

But if you pick up an issue of the magazine now, it seems as though the sense of fun and humor has somehow been drained out. All they do now is whine and moan about how awful the world is and how people are being oppressed by evil corporations. All of the illustrations and fake ads in the magazine now are shown in a washed-out, drab color that may contain “philosophical” quotes such as the one you mentioned above. It may look high-minded and “intellectual” — but it’s not FUN anymore. I don’t just mean not “funny” - it’s not entertaining and FUN anymore. Adbusters used to be a must-read for me, but even though I leaf through the occasional issue, I’m just not inspired by it anymore.

However, their “Buy Nothing Day” campaign is still a worthy cause.