Have we sold our souls?
by Risa Dickens
The Worn Fashion Journal editors have raised what I think is an important issue on their blog, about Advertorials - advertising that looks like editorial content. In conversation we’ve discussed the especially dictatorial nature of this practice in some women’s fashion magazines, and the scary way this can manipulate the availability of ideas about identity in the mainstream, though of course it also pays for some cool art to get made.
Even in our local alternative weeklies I’ve noticed an increase in full page spreads, laid out exactly like the rest of the newsprint magazine, with a relatively subtle indication across the top that this is Advertising. This smallish notice is still frequently much more then is done in fashion to let you know what kind of world you’re in: the product placement in “women’s magazines” can be right in the Editor’s Picks or We Suggest You Buy areas, erasing any line that might have existed between independent opinion and the Sell.
On the web the experiments with paid content have developed and diversified rapidly, and with varying degrees of smarm and sketch, and have faced much impassioned debate.
So of course the question has to be raised - is a sponsorship like the one we’ve been telling you about with Matt and Nat, where core Indyish volunteers all got a free bag, the same thing? Are we compromising our independence and ability to speak freely by taking and talking about their sexy pleather sponsorship? Are we creating an unfair situation where smaller, broker, more emerging creators feel they can’t get the same attention from us, can’t compete, because they can’t give us stuff?
It has to be said, “vegan leather” bag designers Matt and Nat know what they’re doing when it comes to getting attention, as we saw with the insanity of day 1 of their Sample Sale (this video is from their blog):
There’s definitely an element of their marketing that, though it may be motivated by genuine feeling, and involve true community and environmental involvement, plays into frenzy-feeding which can be dehumanizing. We allow Indyish to be part of that by accepting goods in exchange for blogging, and whatever it is that makes an old lady strangle strangers for free bags, I don’t feel super great about being associated with that.
But I think it becomes interesting when the same kind of edgy new corporate anti-advertising throw-stuff-out-of-windows-rebellious style has to, by it’s very nature, be ok with free speech and critical truth-telling, even from the people they support, in fact, especially from them.
If you are a company in this mindset, calling on people to Choose to Make a Difference, you need the people you decide to support to be critical, choosey, vocal, questioning, independent. Willing to tell you when something feels off. Whether you’re a rising rock star, politician, or design house, I think you need to show that you support people who will challenge you to be better, if you really want to have long-lasting trust from your fans and not just screaming and unsustainable adulation. My belief that Matt and Nat would be legitimately supportive (and not controlling) of us saying what we think was the reason I thought we could accept the sponsorship in the first place.
Though I love my new bag, (like in the picture, but Black!) the look and functionality of it, and how it reminds me that this work which has cost us a lot has tangible value, it’s still really up to me to remember that I still need to raise any questions I might have about where it came from, how it got made, who gave it to me, and why. As one of the founders of Indyish and a one time student of bias in communication, I feel like it’s my job to do so publicly.
From the very beginning of Indyish we’ve walked this line and wondered about it, as I was reminded by Tessa’s Blog to the Future: Firsts post. By allowing indie artists who sell things (entrepreneurs, though we may not think of ourselves that way) to sell AND co-author a group blog on the same site we have been effectively encouraging a blurring of the line that gets highlighted when we make a deal with a company like Matt and Nat. It’s the line between independent opinion and the bias of commercial interests,
however small,
or vegan.
For me Indyish has always been about experimenting with this line, exploring it so as to ask questions about where and how bias comes in, and whether we can have a say in it or power over it. I am not a technological determinist - I don’t think any technology, system, corporate structure, or size determines how people must act and develop in response. I don’t think a company or collective becomes evil at a certain size or popularity just because I am interested in supporting independence. I do think we need to watch for specifics in who we get involved with, what kind of reactions they are triggering intentionally or not as they grow, and be thoughtful and vocal about questions and lessons learned about it. We make mistakes and will probably continue to, everybody does. We want to grow, but not in a way that harms anyone, so how do we do it?
Restricting who we get involved with as advertisers or sponsors seems a good start, so we emphasize local, indie, arty, eco, ethical, and a personal relationship that feels good. Featuring the small, indie, broke artists we love in exchange for nothing, fueled by our own fandom and excitement, is probably most important. And keeping the blog a space of open, mutually respectful questioning is crucial too.
When Matt and Nat proposed blogging for bags, the anarchic schemer in me was kind of secretly delighted. There was never any question of Matt and Nat controlling what we could say on our blog about them, that’s not something we would ever agree to or that they asked for. Also I think it’s illegal. Though our team was likely to be gushy and stoked at being recognized for their donated smarts and labour, at least those like Lise and I already fans of the company’s designs, it was possible for any of the other 170+ member groups to be seriously unimpressed by it, to have an any-coloured opinion of their own, and to blog it right here. It is always also possible for any number of stranger commenters to use our site to criticize us or Matt and Nat, as they did on Midnight Poutine, and be well within their rights. The only things I can see us ever deleting on Indyish are posts by people who become threatening in any way, aside from that, have at it. In this context, of which Matt and Nat’s marketing was fully aware, asking us to blog in exchange for bags was like a wink and a nudge and a go ahead, I dares yah.
We’ve sent a bunch of questions to the company that they happily agreed to answer when we asked, and meanwhile we are working on our own research piece about Vegan Leather that is not unequivocally enthusiastic, and which will hopefully be developed into an article for an upcoming issue of Worn.
I think the size and nature of the Internet, and the extended networks that flourish around it, provides space for, provokes, and necessitates experimentation and discussion of every possible variation of opinion and system. To build Indyish, we’re going to try to see if we can continue to work with companies of various sizes to create circuits that bring new funds and opportunities to people involved in making, supporting, and promoting independent art and communication. We will always disclose when we are being sponsored by a company we are writing about, and we’ll keep talking openly about it here and seeking advice from the artists in our community, and if it’s not working we’ll adapt. Our Indyish emphasis will remain on helping indie artists worldwide, one little high five at a time, and trying to make a living doing what we love, while still loving it.
So please don’t hesitate to ask us hard questions here on the blog or when you see us. We have ideas about what we’re going to try, but are going to remain firmly open minded and flexible (yes, firmly flexible!) while trying to figure out what’s useful, sustainable, and right in this crazy, new, ever-more interconnected world.
There is obviously acres more to say about this, but it’s acres long already.
For fun, I’ll leave you with a video Serah from Worn shared with me yesterday, (is it unethical for me to talk about Worn so much, given I’m involved?) This quick dizzying video by Dr. Michael Wesch is about how the web provokes these kinds of change as it evolves, and how the web is us:
Listen to this article
Published on: May 21st, 2008
Terms Used: advertorial, design, entrepreneurs, ethics, fashion, free, indie, matt and nat, montreal, sponsors, vegan, worn
About: Risa Dickens
Risa co-founded Indyish with Elran Oded.
Aside from experimenting with these monstrous/sexy formations, producing Indyish events and developing new and existing Indyish endeavors, and trying to figure out how to do it armed[...]
Browse Indyish Content:
Use the tabs above to navigate between Featured Blog Columns, Product Categories, Popular Tags, and Recent Comments.
yep, I’ve been having similar concerns myself, as I keep “postponing” blogging about my new bag. Yes, my bag is gorgeous and has been almost all I can talk about all week, yes i’ve been biking far less in order to strut around the city à pied with my shoulderful of jade-coloured vegan goodness, yes i’m well aware of how much I went from ‘what’s matt-and-nat?’ to ‘omg i want to buy them all!’ in like a week..and this is precicely why I’ve been “postponing” writing that post. the fact that i’ve been won over with my free 160-dollar bag is far to clear to me. i may have ‘fallen,’ but don’t want to fall more.
that said, they are vegan, and good, and we’re a growing company in search of corporate advertising. corporate does not have to mean evil, but still…as you said, what about that hypothetical little handbag-maker out there that can no longer get a word in edgewise on our newly matt-and-nat obsessed blog?
so thanks for airing out hte closets, risa!! i think we all needed to talk about that.
Posted on May 22nd, 2008 at 5:09 pm [permalink]
EXCELLENT post. really thought-provoking and thought-affirming at the same time. and strangely enough, it got me thinking about free stuff from my childhood… with a mum high in the advertising world, we had a house full of global and ctv blankets, kellogg’s-stamped cereal bowls, and random oprah/wtsn/etc mugs… i think we even had a deck of leo burnett (ad agency) playing cards! my friends would always laugh about my house being the “branded house” but i think i found it normal, as it was like that since birth. clients really loved giving the free stuff! (oh, and hockey games in the luxury network boxes from my single-digit years on…) i think to us it was pretty much a feeling of “oh, well, this may have a logo on it, but it was a free gift / token of appreciation for mummy and it’s useful, so why not use it?”
Posted on May 22nd, 2008 at 6:11 pm [permalink]
I got over my aversion to money when I finished business school and realized that business should not be blocked out and isolated from the rest of our lives. Business is life. It grew organically from our human experience and discovering we could do more as a group than as individuals.
That being said, I think of business as a chain or network of mutually beneficial relationships and transactions which allow us all to get on with our lives. What do we know about business? You are only as good as the people around you. It’s not what you know, it’s who you know. Etc.
I think finding a balance that works for you and your company and being transparent about the choices you make is as much as can be expected from any moral person, be it a human or a company for that matter!
Sponsorship is scary for a company in the free media realm, and in times of confusion, i find the best thing is to ask specific questions. What are you trying to accomplish? If you’re trying to help the little people, boosting your profile by hooking up with bigger fish may very well serve the best interest of your whole group. You may feel like you’re alienating smaller bag makers in this particular example, but this becomes one of those classic ethical conundrums where you rip your heart apart wondering if you should reroute the train and kill the one person to save the 500 passengers.
These make for thought-provoking and necessary conversations (and blog posts) but aren’t very practical when it comes to running your day-to-day business.
So after all that, I think it’s a great approach you’re taking and I think you shouldn’t feel too apologetic about participating a successful business relationship! It’s a good thing!
Posted on May 23rd, 2008 at 5:39 pm [permalink]
I’m actually curious to hear more from Sarah about her comment: “they are vegan, and good, and we’re a growing company in search of corporate advertising. corporate does not have to mean evil, but still…”
Proclaiming Matt & Nat as “good” (vs. bad, I suppose) alarms me. What is “good” in this context? What is on the checklist for deciding that a company is “good”? What would make a company “bad”? Isn’t that kind of relative? I would argue that throwing handbags out of windows to induce consumer frenzy is, well, bad. Creepy. Disturbing.
Also stating that you are a growing company in search of corporate advertising - the name of this site “indyish” makes me think that “indyish” is just it - we’re “indie” until we can score some big bucks and then we will just be “ish”?
But most of all, what is meant by “corporate doesn’t have to mean evil?”
What is “evil”? I am straining my brain to think of some truly ethical corporations, and I’m getting a headache.
However, I am biased. A relative of mine was recently screwed over by a soon-to-be internationally huge corporation (which is already North American huge) who advertises themselves as warm, friendly, eco-aware (gawd I would love to name names but there are legal things pending…) and they are, in reality, quite evil. Money money money money. Money, and sleek new bags, can skew previously hard held beliefs.
I like M&N designs, and have lusted after their products, but I will never buy them - because I have a thing about labels. I don’t like to have to dish out 100+ bucks for a bag that pronounces to everyone who made it. I don’t like to advertise brands (my business lady briefcase has a sticker slapped over the brand label) - I used to cut the levi’s tag off my jeans when I was a teenager. I wish M & N would just put a label inside the bag and not have their logo stamped in all its pleather “goodness” on the front. I’m not interested in letting everyone know whose bag I’m carrying, but I get that some people like to announce that sort of thing.
“good” and “evil” are subjective, tricky little words.
However, a free bag is a free bag! And though it has been pointed out that M&N are not dictating what you must say about their products - is anyone at indyish REALLY going to say anything bad about the product - especially if you are a growing company in search of corporate sponsorship? No. You will say good things, because you need to grow your business, and as Nadine has pointed out, business is business. You have to pay your rent and feed yourself somehow. We all do.
Posted on May 24th, 2008 at 1:13 am [permalink]
Good and evil are slippery words indeed, and most companies and individuals aren’t stuck in one of the two but blurred up with both and changing over time. I like Nadine’s point that business emerges from life, is part of life. I certainly feel like business is now part of my life in a way I never really imagined! To be honest, this has been really hard for me to reconcile. I want Indyish to be successful on lots of levels, but fear of being part of the problem can be paralyzing. I can be angsty about this until the cows come home, and definitely need to think carefully about whether a sponsorship like this free bag fun really serves indyish’s goals - our intention is not to find any and all corporate sponsorship but to find ways of channeling money and support from likeminded companies and orgs towards indies and volunteers in the network.
We’ve been talking about sustainable and mutually supportive relationships from the beginning, and that’s the meaning of the name Indyish - not to do with small or big, or casting judgment on people’s career choices, but with finding ways to connect and support indie artists through the network. To do this as more then a hobby, to do it in a way that let’s us (Elran and I) live our dream too, of making a living doing what we love while still loving it, we need to get paid somehow. This job takes too much labour and stress to do it for free forever - if our goal is to keep most things free for the artists, I can’t feel guilty when sponsorship or advertising helps us produce free shows, free web tools, or cover our hosting and bandwidth costs. That said, some sponsorships have clear value. Bringing in money that allows us to pay artists and staff is not just the goal, it’s also way easier to justify then sexy bags that make us walking ads.
Thanks for all your comments and insights on this important issue guys. French Panic - All the best to your relative!!
Posted on May 24th, 2008 at 8:43 am [permalink]
lots of interesting questions raised in this post and the comments…it makes me think about the ethics of self-promotion and community-building.
i mean, as an example, French Panic you say that you cut the logos off your jeans and cover over logos on your briefcase, but in your comment on this post you’ve chosen to stamp your comment with a link to your own blog (and most people do this, when commenting). this encouraged me to visit your blog to see what you do. and i might not have found it otherwise.
is it different because it’s your own work? there’s a trickiness around self-promotion, and talking about art by friends or people in our community. when are you advertising and when are you just sharing your life and work? if indyish chooses to work with companies (people) whose work we support, is talking about them a natural word-of-mouth activity, like you would discuss “what you’re up to”? when a friend gives you a freebie copy of their cd and you talk about how good (or bad) it is to people, or write about it on your blog, is that advertising?
if we’re forming relationships with the companies giving us free stuff (or money), is it that different from receiving things from people who we have relationships with already, especially if the point of an artist network is to connect with other artists and groups. does having the monetary or goods exchange as part of what created the relationship make it evil?
it’s naive to think of marketing in the art world as somehow more true to human interaction than when big money and corporations are involved, although it’s easier to write-off (and thereby justify) unethical corporate activity for being detached from our daily experience.
Posted on May 24th, 2008 at 3:42 pm [permalink]
Except, (and correct me if I’m wrong) it’s not like MN called Indyish up and just offered them bags for being so cool. Indyish approached MN and pitched some ad space, and a deal with bags was struck instead. There was an agreement made that in exchange for the bags there would be blog posting. This is product placement. I’m not saying that bad or good - I’m not really sure - but that is what it is. This is a very different thing from handing a free CD over to a friend.
Posted on May 24th, 2008 at 11:04 pm [permalink]
Hey Tessa - Excellent point about me leaving a link to my blog…. self-promotion, etc.
Because OF COURSE I would try to promote the hell out of a friend’s CD or art show or whatever, but I am also very much aware that my little blog project is read by very very VERY few people - it never started out as a money making venture - and I doubt it will ever be a money making venture. However, IF someone wanted to give me free stuff, depending on the product, chances are my inner hypocrite would make an appearance.
I actually had a good little laugh at myself yesterday as I was wearing a hoodie that has the name of a company blaringly stamped on it (I had a mild freak out in the store where I bought it as I really liked the sweater and it looked really good on me, but was having difficulty reconciling my stance on labels — and I ended up buying it based on my boyfriend telling me it looked really good, while rolling his eyes at my own hypocrisy - so, uh, vanity. O Damned Vanity!)…. so, yeah. Complicated issue.
I think it’s really good that you all are discussing the ramifications of “free stuff” and that you are displaying quite a bit of transparency in your intentions.
Self promotion is difficult - and I know it is very difficult for creative people who are used to creating…alone. For example, at Expozine, the self-doubt in the air is palpable, and some people are waaaay better at making nice and smiling and chatting about their stuff. Other people might make great stuff but with no self-confidence, or no conviction that their stuff is fantastic, their art will be forgotten.
And community building, like what Indyish is doing, is also so important… promoting friends who otherwise would have no clue how to promote themselves, is so, so, so important.
Ultimately, we all need money. It can really mess with your head to think things over too much when it comes to consumerism: buying organic & buying local & buying only from “ethical” companies is often something that is much too expensive for regular folk - and the ones who can afford to do that…it doesn’t even cross their minds. Everyone has different priorities. How many times have I drooled over indie-designed jewellery or other products and then realize there is NO WAY I can afford $60 earrings?
Then again, how many times have I walked into various mile end boutiques and been completely ignored by the staff who are busy chatting up their friends…? There’s better customer service at, say, Jacob - and that can be a huge influence. Independent doesn’t translate to awesome, and the massive corporate machine doesn’t translate to bad - as others have mentioned.
Posted on May 25th, 2008 at 1:39 pm [permalink]