5 ms·

Which significant cultural works have been ad-funded?

Hoasi 11y ago
Good question. The jury might still be out on this one though. You could argue one way or another, as it depends on what is your definition if advertising. Advertising is not art but the industry used to have its share of regretful artists. Some artists in the 20th century, like Andy Warhol, made publicity the whole point of their art. It is common for film directors to raise money trying their hand at advertising before shooting features. Despite the poor reputation of advertising in "art" circles, quite a few visual artists blurred the frontiers between the two. For craftsmen, it doesn't matter as long as they can use their skills to make something—and they need the money, too. I understand the bad rap advertising gets, especially online, and wonder why it is still seen as the dominant revenue model on the web. Still, I'd love to read cases of significant artists who used advertising to fund their art.
- dreamfactory2 11y ago
  It's not as fuzzy a question as you make out. People like Warhol and Koons may have satirised consumer culture, but this is completely different to the assumption that quality content can/must be funded by an advertising business model for some reason - there aren't even any examples of this (beyond Michael Jackson Pepsi videos and similar).
eevilspock 11y ago
Imagine if instead of libraries we made literature accessible to everyone by inserting ads, including "native ads" and product placements in the stories! Egads!
- mirimir 11y ago
  Excellent point. Libraries are public services. They're funded by private groups and governments. But it's not just about charity. There's an expectation of social benefit, which indirectly benefits even private funders.
comex 11y ago
Do you think no TV shows were significant cultural works before the creation of cable TV?
- chiaro 11y ago
  While a good point, "good" (as in critically acclaimed) television is disproportionately from networks like HBO, BBC and Netflix that are supported by other means.
munificent 11y ago
I never said I like ad-funding, nor that I dislike it. It's interesting that almost every reply to my comment assumes a binary viewpoint. I responded to a single sentence of the parent comment. I never claimed to be on the "opposing team" of the comment's author. But, to answer your question, the reporting of the Watergate scandal comes to mind.

Hoasi 11y ago

Good question. The jury might still be out on this one though. You could argue one way or another, as it depends on what is your definition if advertising. Advertising is not art but the industry used to have its share of regretful artists. Some artists in the 20th century, like Andy Warhol, made publicity the whole point of their art. It is common for film directors to raise money trying their hand at advertising before shooting features. Despite the poor reputation of advertising in "art" circles, quite a few visual artists blurred the frontiers between the two. For craftsmen, it doesn't matter as long as they can use their skills to make something—and they need the money, too. I understand the bad rap advertising gets, especially online, and wonder why it is still seen as the dominant revenue model on the web. Still, I'd love to read cases of significant artists who used advertising to fund their art.

dreamfactory2 11y ago
It's not as fuzzy a question as you make out. People like Warhol and Koons may have satirised consumer culture, but this is completely different to the assumption that quality content can/must be funded by an advertising business model for some reason - there aren't even any examples of this (beyond Michael Jackson Pepsi videos and similar).

eevilspock 11y ago

Imagine if instead of libraries we made literature accessible to everyone by inserting ads, including "native ads" and product placements in the stories! Egads!

mirimir 11y ago
Excellent point. Libraries are public services. They're funded by private groups and governments. But it's not just about charity. There's an expectation of social benefit, which indirectly benefits even private funders.

comex 11y ago

Do you think no TV shows were significant cultural works before the creation of cable TV?

chiaro 11y ago
While a good point, "good" (as in critically acclaimed) television is disproportionately from networks like HBO, BBC and Netflix that are supported by other means.

munificent 11y ago

I never said I like ad-funding, nor that I dislike it. It's interesting that almost every reply to my comment assumes a binary viewpoint. I responded to a single sentence of the parent comment. I never claimed to be on the "opposing team" of the comment's author. But, to answer your question, the reporting of the Watergate scandal comes to mind.