Graffiti [Hypocrite] Eradication Partnership
Is it just me or is there a not an inordinate amount of hypocrisy in this image:
I’m guessing the good people at the Graffiti Eradication Partnership are against graffiti because it is unsightly. Might I be so bold as to suggest that their hideous advertisement signage (as seen above) is possibly more ugly than any graffiti I think I have ever seen – particularly given it’s location.
Perhaps someone (I’ll gladly do so, but I fear they might not listen) should also point out that the only thing that separates graffiti from advertising signage is money. Seemingly if you pay for the application of text and colour on an upright surface it’s not considered to be graffiti. What’s worse (ignoring 0800 quickloo…?) is that the thing is sponsored by a paint company? WTF? That’s like a car manufacturer sponsoring an accident black spot – why would you do that (Although you have to admire the media buy)?
People of the Graffiti Eradication Partnership: get a grip. Are you really so short-sighted that you cannot see that your sign is actually worse than the graffiti itself.
Not only because it looks worse than graffiti – but because graffiti isn’t a divvy hypocrite.
Comments
2 Responses to “Graffiti [Hypocrite] Eradication Partnership”
Leave a Reply
I found a similar thing last night where the people weren’t true to their righteous word.
http://allhale.blogspot.com/2009/04/daffiti.html
[...] good folks at the Graffiti Eradication Partnership will be spilling their [...]