Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Apple = wankers

jæd said:
They've added two words to it. Big deal... They've also put up a page on who she was, what she did and why she needed to do it.

TBH, if Microsoft did the same thing I wouldn't be bothered either -- anything which fights racism is good news IMHO... :

Two words and their fucking logo. They've 'branded' it. Can't you see?
 
pinkmonkey said:
Two words and their fucking logo. They've 'branded' it. Can't you see?

Right, of course, no-one else can refer to her apart from as "Apple's Rosa Parks". And I thought they were trying to point out that she "Thought Different"....
 
jæd said:
Right, of course, no-one else can refer to her apart from as "Apple's Rosa Parks". And I thought they were trying to point out that she "Thought Different"....

Well, I think it's poor taste to brand a photo of someone who can't answer back with their logo and mission statement.

If it was any of my relatives pics I'd be really pissed off.
 
tarannau said:
It's a storm in a teacup if you ask me
Why can't I shake off the feeling that your reaction would be somewhat different if, say, Microsoft had set about branding a recently departed civil rights activist with their logo and mission statement?

Could it be because you are a very enthusiastic Mac owner?

No! Surely not!
:D :D :D
 
pinkmonkey said:
Well, I think it's poor taste to brand a photo of someone who can't answer back with their logo and mission statement.

If it was any of my relatives pics I'd be really pissed off.

Perhaps they probably cleared it with her relatives first...? Or perhaps they thought they'd just deal with the angry relatives...
 
hitBAD.jpg


Shippou-Chan - you are a genius!!!!

What a nice compliment to Apple's 'Think Different' marketing campaign!
You're toying with us aren't you SC. You work in an advertising agency responsible for Apple's branding don't you?
 
in the past the used photo's of jim henson (deceased), picasso (deceased), gandhi (dec.) and maybe even MLK (etc.) ..

anyone know if they had permission? if they needed it?
 
editor said:
Why can't I shake off the feeling that your reaction would be somewhat different if, say, Microsoft had set about branding a recently departed civil rights activist with their logo and mission statement?

I'd agree with them pointing out that racism needs to be stopped. But I'd still think that most of their products suck...
 
I'm confused by the outrage - would people have been as upset if it had been Microsoft? (Genuine question.) Or do people somehow expect Apple to be more saintly? I can't say I'm particularly surprised at any company doing this. I think it's pretty tasteless, but then it's advertising, after all...
 
editor said:
Why can't I shake off the feeling that your reaction would be somewhat different if, say, Microsoft had set about branding a recently departed civil rights activist with their logo and mission statement?

Could it be because you are a very enthusiastic Mac owner?

No! Surely not!
:D :D :D


Unlikely. I'm also a less than enthusiastic everyday pc user too. Besides I can't even remember the last Microsoft strapline - they'd probably have Rosa Parks burbling that fecking Intel chime...

I still reckon it's a storm in a teacup myself. In retrospect, checking the Apple website again, they'd have been better to take off 'Think Different' off the image itself, because it seems unnecessarily commercial - the links and 'giog' behind the link are pretty well written and intentioned if you ask me.

It's not really advertising though is it; the picture's only used on Apple's website - if customers have reached there, Apple's already attracted them. It's more whether you believe Apple's attempt to associate itself it with Rosa Parks is particularly objectionable. And besides, Parks's estate is more than likely to have approved this whole campaign with their blessing - I've never managed to pull off such a campaign without permission and conditions attached.
 
This is all a bit OTT.

Yes It's is a bit much of Apple to use her image on their home page, but then again if it draws attention to what she did then surely that's a good thing?

The only people that should really give a shit are Rosa Parks family. I wonder what they make of it, they probably gave their consent for it to be used.

I don't think Apple are using her image to cash in, it would be stupid to think that they are going to sell more G5's for iPods by doing so.

Still doesn't make me feel 100% confortable, I can see both sides to the argument.
 
editor said:
Why can't I shake off the feeling that your reaction would be somewhat different if, say, Microsoft had set about branding a recently departed civil rights activist with their logo and mission statement?

Could it be because you are a very enthusiastic Mac owner?

No! Surely not!
:D :D :D


Unlikely. I'm also a less than enthusiastic everyday pc user too. Besides I can't even remember the last Microsoft strapline - they'd probably have Rosa Parks burbling that fecking Intel chime...

I still reckon it's a storm in a teacup myself. In retrospect, checking the Apple website again, they'd have been better to take off 'Think Different' off the image itself, because it seems unnecessarily commercial - the links and 'biog' behind the link are pretty well written and intentioned if you ask me.

It's not really advertising though is it; the picture's only used on Apple's website - if customers have reached there, Apple's already attracted them. It's more whether you believe Apple's attempt to associate itself it with Rosa Parks is particularly objectionable. And besides, Parks's estate is more than likely to have approved this whole campaign with their blessing - I've never managed to pull off such a campaign without permission and significant conditions attached. We did a few similar inititatives on the Getty website for example, only after signifcant negotiation with the photographer's estates though...
 
Dask said:
Yes It's is a bit much of Apple to use her image on their home page, but then again if it draws attention to what she did then surely that's a good thing?
It's all down to whether people feel comfortable with multi billion $$$ corporates exploiting people like Rosa Parks to promote their brand values and enhance their "cool" rating.

I think it's despicable. But then I'm strongly against this sort of corporate shit!
 
editor said:
It's all down to whether people feel comfortable with multi billion $$$ corporates exploiting people like Rosa Parks to promote their brand values and enhance their "cool" rating.

I think it's despicable. But then I'm strongly against this sort of corporate shit!

That's fair enough, I must admit I don't like the idea of it myself.
 
And the irony is that if they'd just left off the logo and the slogan, they'd be fine. Instead, they're wankers. See what a few thousand pixels can do.
 
If it was a picture of Rosa with RIP on it or something, fair play. But to publish that picture and add your wanky 'mission statement' or 'slogan' to it....
exploiting people like Rosa Parks to promote their brand values and enhance their "cool" rating.

I gotta agree with this.
 
It's an old image, originally used by Apple during the first Think Different bus-side campaign, with Rosa Park's permission, some years ago. I have a copy somewhere.

Edit:
redlightrunner_1869_3842718
 
I doubt they could have used the picture without. Can't remember what year - I'll check.

Edit: The poster featured in the Think Different Yearbook in 1998.
 
moose said:
I doubt they could have used the picture without.
Still doesn't make the corporate branding of her act of defiance any more forgiveable, in my book.

Nor do I feel any more comfortable with Apple using her death as an opportunity to raise their profile to flog a few computers.

Mind you, they got it right in Spinal Tap: "death sells"!"
 
I'm not seeing any reference to Rosa Parks on the Apple home page. Have they deleted it already?

What, exactly, did it say?
 
Thanks for the picture.

I think it's in pretty poor taste, personally. If they just used it without the logo, i could probably get on board with the idea of a tribute, but they just couldn't resist turning it into an offensive promotional gimmick.
 
Back
Top Bottom