But that only works if the satirization is still somehow stylistically distinct to be recognizable as a satirization of your brand.
You could put Wendy’s, Walmart, Northrup Grumman, Tyson, Bank of America, whatever, into this, and just change the last line a little bit, and I still would not be able to determine if its satire or not.
Twofold reasons:
1 Corporate Advertisement in general is almost completely stylistically played out. Almost everyone has tried almost every approach. It’s all just blended together, at least for me, into ‘insert nearly any kind of rhetoric or style or music or imagery here’ followed by: So buy the thing.
Sure, there are still some general trends for certain marketed product types … but …
2 Is anything on Twitter/X genuine? First we had a whole bunch of brand accounts acting like increasingly twitter brained idiots, then we had Musk’s disastrous takeover and blue check fiasco with people impersonating corpo accounts running wild, now the bots are even more widespread AND the general corpo trend seems to be ‘yes actually just have AI generate/do everything’, why wouldn’t text only posts currently be able to be handed over to an edgy ChatGPT model?
Like… this image, the account has some kind of silver tick or badge or something.
Is that from older Twitter era meaning its verified?
Was the account hacked?
Was this image photoshopped?
…
Can you even tell the difference between a serious idiot, an unserious troll, or a bot mimicking one of those, without an investigation?
You could put Wendy’s, Walmart, Northrup Grumman, Tyson, Bank of America, whatever, into this, and just change the last line a little bit, and I still would not be able to determine if its satire or not.
I read this as an oblique reference to the “you’re not you when you’re hungry” campaign. It’s a bit of a reach, but it works.
Corporate Advertisement in general is almost completely stylistically played out
It’s like any other thing with fashion or styles. Trends come and go, different eras have distinct markers, later eras may intentionally evoke references or tributes to earlier eras, or other contemporary trends in other fields.
Meme aside, either one of those guys straight up shilling? Ehg.
btw in my personal opinion:
You’re 35 years old, mired in college debt that did nothing for the career you have and hate. You’ll never own a house. You can’t even consider having children. You’re filled with anxiety over climate change, inevitable wars. The world is doomed.
When life feels extra spicy, cool down with a Frosty. It won’t fix everything, but it’s a start. Wendy’s.
But that only works if the satirization is still somehow stylistically distinct to be recognizable as a satirization of your brand.
You could put Wendy’s, Walmart, Northrup Grumman, Tyson, Bank of America, whatever, into this, and just change the last line a little bit, and I still would not be able to determine if its satire or not.
Twofold reasons:
1 Corporate Advertisement in general is almost completely stylistically played out. Almost everyone has tried almost every approach. It’s all just blended together, at least for me, into ‘insert nearly any kind of rhetoric or style or music or imagery here’ followed by: So buy the thing.
Sure, there are still some general trends for certain marketed product types … but …
2 Is anything on Twitter/X genuine? First we had a whole bunch of brand accounts acting like increasingly twitter brained idiots, then we had Musk’s disastrous takeover and blue check fiasco with people impersonating corpo accounts running wild, now the bots are even more widespread AND the general corpo trend seems to be ‘yes actually just have AI generate/do everything’, why wouldn’t text only posts currently be able to be handed over to an edgy ChatGPT model?
Like… this image, the account has some kind of silver tick or badge or something.
Is that from older Twitter era meaning its verified?
Was the account hacked?
Was this image photoshopped?
…
Can you even tell the difference between a serious idiot, an unserious troll, or a bot mimicking one of those, without an investigation?
I read this as an oblique reference to the “you’re not you when you’re hungry” campaign. It’s a bit of a reach, but it works.
It’s like any other thing with fashion or styles. Trends come and go, different eras have distinct markers, later eras may intentionally evoke references or tributes to earlier eras, or other contemporary trends in other fields.
The next comment I read after yours links to:
Meme aside, either one of those guys straight up shilling? Ehg.
btw in my personal opinion: