Non-Originally uploaded by NMEfoofoo
It's obvious to me that graffiti comes in two forms, corporate and streetwise. I can't tolerate graffiti too. I wouldn't be here if I wasn't trying to learn more about this new technology for GPSing graffiti taggers.
The question about the Nike billboard truly is key to describing my point. On the one hand, you may see businesses like fastfood advertise their name (usually high above the ground where a tagger cannot vandalize it), but when they use their own property to do this, that doesn't make it advertising, it falls under being part of the facility's architecture. The corporate execs would claim they post their company logo high above ground so that it's more visible to passersby, but one could debate that and say that mug shots of Colonel Sanders displayed on a spinning bucket of chicken sits way up high on a pole because no tagger in hell is going to climb that pole to deface that image.
Approach the same execs claiming they want to be as visible as possible, with the question why doesn't Taco Bell use the billboard up the street, a block away, to clue oncoming traffic that a Taco Bell is oncoming? Other major highway signs utilize billboards in this method. They won't say it's because it's too expensive because that lowers property value. My point is, who wants to have dinner at a restaurant with a brand new sneaker displayed next to the establishment?