ALL | ALT REPORT | CLASSIC
communism
A Revolutionary Personal Brand.
Photo by the cobrasnake


According to the Wikipedia Encyclopedia, Che Guevara was born in 1928. I feel bad for him, because there is no way that he could have effectively monetized his Communist Revolutionary brand correctly (facial image + kute lil miltary bro hat). I feel like there should be some sort of 'licensing privileges' for his family, because ppl freely use his image just to 'seem kewl' when they go out 2 party. I know that Ralph Lauren gets paid when any1 wears 'a lil polo bro', but I am not sure if Che gets money when u wear one of his shirts. I am not sure what Che Guevara stands for--I think he was a commy/'red.' Not sure if communism would save us right now even though we are in an economic crisis. It might be sweet because I recently went to a sweet art show in a public space held by 'communist vegans.'

Feel bad for Obama. Not sure if his 'image' belongs to any one. When the HOPE meme was first made, I thought it was 'just an internet meme', but I can imagine African Americans wearing that shirt in 10-1000 years as some sort of metaphorical figure who was 'kewler than MLK.' Sorta like 'the Michael Jackson of politics.'

I am not sure how to feel about memes, and images of people who apparently 'stand for more than just themselves.' Feel like they need to be able to protect themselves.'

Hope that the now deceased singer 'Michael Jackson' was compensated appropriately when Crystal Castles used an image of her for their tshirt.

I am worried that when Che Guevara dies, no one who represents his estate will be able to capitalize off his image if places like Hot Topic start to sell pix of him on tshirts.

Just want every1 to get paid for the art that they make. Want people with extraordinary personal brands to be compensated appropriately when people piggyback on their personal brands to seem 'way more authentic.'

The White Stripes plan to sue the Air Force/US Govt 4 stealing their song


Popular mainstream rock band sometimes marketed as indie the White Stripes had a 'shitty version' of their song "Fell in Love With A Girl" ripped off and utilized in a Super Bowl commercial by the Air Force, a popular branch of the US military which uses jets to bomb Arab and terrorist hideouts.  The White Stripes were not given 'mad bank' for the usage of their song [via commercial licensing].

It seems like they also got 'mad pissed' because they stole their song to promote the recruitment of dumb, minority soldiers to fight in a war that they don't support. I remember back when George W. Bush was in office, it was good for artists to speak up against the government, but this is a risky move since they are theoretically 'not supporting Obama.'

I wonder if this will hurt the White Stripes' brand in the long run with mainstream markets. Even though their 'classic rock' sound appeals to the masses in Middle America, they might gain an anti-American brand. Theoretically, the band should be more patriotic, and lend their song to the campaign for free. I feel like I would rather have the US military branches 'market themselves' to the masses, as opposed to having some sort of mandatory draft.

Do u think the White Stripes should sue 'soccer' for stealing the riff from their hit song "Seven Nation Army"? [via crowd chants]

</embed>

When your song is 'stolen'/'sampled', should you be proud that it was good/relevant?
By not supporting the Air Force marketing campaign, are they helping the terrorists?
Should we support Obama's withdrawal plan?
Do the White Stripes wear red because they are 'commies'?

Will their next album be mad boycotted/blacklisted by the US govt?
WWTAFD: What Would The Arcade Fire Do?
Will the US Air Force lose 40% of their enlistment by indie music fans?