Thursday, March 31, 2011

[Week 8] Self.gov: Resistance

Culture Jamming (CJ, same below) is used for criticising consumer culture, an approach to subvert mainstream organisations. It is often seen in a form of subvertisments (= subvert + advertisements), which sabotage corporate advertisements or criticise political messages. Common ways include re-figuring logos and marketing campaigns as a means to produce irony or humorous commentary. CJ challenges the idea of "what is cool?" and other disputed problems in the consumer culture.

Examples: 1) LV = Less Valuable 2) HK example of political subvertisment


Another form of CJ is Pranking. Prankster creates a comedic effect rather than make ironic subvertisment. Instead of confronting consumerism with the activism, they make use of the corporate images. The appropriation provokes the public to think the ‘untold side’.

Examples: 1) Food Liberation Army kidnapped Ronald McDonald!!!


2) HK example of Pranking on newspaper Metro Daily

However, the example(s) of pranking in HK are found to be debatable, in a sense that the creators/organisers have no intention to involve in a media activism or any social movement. Their aims are only to make joke/have fun. (If anyone can find a good-fit pranking example in HK, please do post&share!!)

So, here comes the discussion!

Discussion question 1: The writer of this week's reading regards Adbusters, the culture jammer, as reactionary. She argues that it only tells everyone to say no to brands, but never gives any suggestion. On the contrary, pranking is more proactive, since it doesn't just ask people to say no, but provokes us to think about the activism. So, in reality...
a) how reactionary subvestisment actually is? Can it also be proactive, to trigger our thoughts?
b) Vice versa, how proactive pranking is? Does it also react, to respond the resistance?

Discussion question 2: To assess how successful/effective subvertisment and pranking is, we think of a 4-level criteria for evaluation. The following show the success/effectiveness from low to high...
a) understand the activism
b) agree with it
c) participate online
d) protest also in real life
Regarding to this criteria, which is more successful/effective, subvertisment or pranking?
If one is chosen, how/to what extent it is successful/effective?
(*Plz don't use the HK example(s) of pranking mentioned, as they are arguable.)

Plz do join the discussion! Waiting for u guys to leave comments!
Posted by at

4 comments:

  1. kit chanApril 1, 2011 at 3:33 AM

    This is a really interesting topic, because after changing the advertisment, the messages are always more funny.

    about the difference of culture jamming and pranking, i have a clear mind now after the presentation.

    i agree that the effectiveness of pranking is more than culture jamming. the effect from pranking can make us think about the fact and messages clearly by ourselves. however, there is few example of pranking in Hong kong.
    we should find more example to see how pranking impress us.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ho YoyoApril 3, 2011 at 10:16 AM

    Thanks Natalie and Sylive for clearly defining culture jamming and pranking!

    I think it's difficult to conclude either culture jamming or pranking is more effective/successful, since the determining factors such as purposes of creators, accuracy and understanding towards the messages received by audience etc, also play a signifanct role on analysing their effectiveness.

    However, apart from the evaluation, I got another question based on this topic in relation to the course.

    Taking the underwear ads from Calvin Klein emphasing masculinity and femininity as an example, does the culture jammed picture - Reality for Men (http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/1451/picture1eu.png) actually break down the pre-existing idea of gendered embodiment or reinforce the gendered stereotype on our bodies?

    Moreover, nowadays, women are able to master the technological skills on subvertisment and pranking, and voice out their concerns/rights/opinions via such "informal" channels. Thus, are the females empowered? At last, does the culture jamming and pranking become a "soft power" to liberate females?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Natalie_:P_angApril 23, 2011 at 1:02 AM

    Thanks Kit and Yoyo for carrying on the discussion here.

    Kit's right. Examples of pranking are hardly found in HK. The one we found can't be treated as a real pranking case as the reason mensioned above. Maybe HK people are not naughty enough.

    For the evaluation of a subvertisement or pranking, it is regarded as 'effective' when more and more people take part in the activity or movement. The evaluation criteria that Yoyo mentioned maybe the points one consider when deciding whether or not to take part in it.
    If I interpret correctly, from Yoyo point of view, clear delivery of message, support for the creator's intention and correct infomation are what a culture-jammer or pranker need. What is your point of view? What else do they need to successfully getting people involved in real life instead of online participation?

    For Yoyo's question on the culutre-jammed pic 'Reality for Men'http://www.adbusters.org/content/reality-men, I don't quite get the idea of 'gendered embodiment' and 'gendered stereotype on our bodies'. It'd be better if it is further explained. As far as I obsever, I think that what the culture-jammer intented to do is to attack CK this brand and break the idea that the advertisers of the company posed on males about their ideal body.

    The questions about women and technology are thought-provoking and I think they are best discussed in the topic of Week 11 which is about how technology liberate working women. :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. abMay 1, 2011 at 11:50 AM

    Thanks for the presentation about culture jamming.

    It is one of the topics which I interested most in this unit. I now have a more clear concept about the differences of culture jamming and pranking as they are quite similar things.

    There are lots of practices of culture jamming or pranking in nowadays, with the information-rich Internet and advanced technology. Especially in Hong Kong, it is obvious that in these few years, a lot of cultre jamming works have appeared to criticize the unfair situations in the society. Your example of Metro Daily to understand pranking.

    For me, I think culture jamming will become more popular in the future. Although there are some limitations of its effectiveness, it is still an important way for the public to challenge the authorities and fight for their rights. In the contemporary technological and online-based society, everyone can do a culture jamming.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)