Those rock ‘n’ roll rebels also didn’t like their names being used to endorse commercial products without their permission. In that sense, nothing has changed.
The whole point of a magazine like Rolling Stone is to use their likenesses and music to promote commercial products. Otherwise it wouldn’t exist. They’re just mad because they don’t like this product. If their likenesses had been used to endorse Fender Guitars or The Gap by mere proximity of the ad to their images on separate pages of the magazine, no one would have said a thing. And in fact, this happens all the time. Ad managers are paid to exploit those relationships when organizing the magazine.
More to the point, these companies. Not getting used by The Man has always been a theme in rock and roll, and regardless of what you think about cigarettes themselves, tobacco companies are the distilled essence of The Man.
There’s also a big difference between being written up in a magazine that also happens to advertise a product and appearing in the ad itself. This “Special Pull-Out Section” was somewhere in the gray area between the two, and the dispute is over where you draw the like between Cool and Not Cool.
I understand the connection between drugs, alcohol, and rock. I understand that they can be associated with each other, but I don’t see why they have to be associated with each other. If these bands don’t want to endorse coffin nails, more power to them. I have certainly never had a problem enjoying rock music in spite of my unwillingness to smoke or endorse smoking.
Let me give you another example. Until five or so years ago, NASCAR had strong ties to Big Tobacco (RJ Reynolds). This trickled down to the local level. I might have the exact name wrong, but I raced in a Winston NASCAR Weekly Series. I couldn’t change the title of the series, but I never put the Winston stickers on my car. RJ Reynolds may have done a lot for NASCAR over the years, but it was a deal with the devil. Finally disassociating themselves with Big Tobacco was one of the best things NASCAR ever did.
At a quick glance, which is all I care to give it, it appears that the ad and the spread are interrelated. Camel supports indy labels and here are some of the bands.
I find this hard to believe. I mean, I know that cigarettes are evil and that we hate them, but there are no cartoons on any of the actual Camel advertisements. They’re going to get in trouble because they allegedly tried to get their ad nearby content with cartoons in it? In Rolling Fucking Stone?
The argument is the same as the one for commercial misappropriation – that the fold-out section is essentially an integral part of the Camels ad.
I don’t know what this is supposed to mean.