Art and social displays in the branding of the city: Token screens or opportunities for difference?
AbstractEven though urban screens can be seen as digital substitutes to public space image display, it is my contention that they are additional public spaces that as windows offer the potential of broadening use and participation. Most urban screens such as billboards have the purpose of displaying products for consumption within a cultural logic designed to address consumer audiences. The different strategies used to entice the consumer individual are varied, relying on culturally informed responses that advertisement agencies research. These strategies are also included in the way in which cities – through urban development initiatives – seek to generate a brand that will provide a competitive edge in attracting both a professional class of residents and tourists, to the city. This paper seeks to illustrate the uses of screens designed for the display of art in Times Square, NYC, their content as well as their role in the branding of the city with the aid of the Times Square Alliance that exemplifies trends in the privatisation of public space. By looking at the Panasonic Screen used by Creative time to display video art in that part of New York City, this paper will: 1) determine the content, purpose and possible meanings that emerge from the use of screens to display art and social issues as well as possibilities for other kinds of community and cultural contents different from the sole purpose of advertisement. A critical assessment of the content these images might offer, the inclusion of context and other pertinent information that could provide a broader perspective in the understanding of the images can be – it is my contention – acquired through the conceptualisation of screens to include the public spaces where they are located as an extension, a physical site for dialogue and public engagement.
How to Cite
Nevárez, J. (2006). Art and social displays in the branding of the city: Token screens or opportunities for difference?. First Monday. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v0i0.1551
Authors submitting a paper to First Monday automatically agree to confer a limited license to First Monday if and when the manuscript is accepted for publication. This license allows First Monday to publish a manuscript in a given issue. Authors have a choice of: 1. Dedicating the article to the public domain. This allows anyone to make any use of the article at any time, including commercial use. A good way to do this is to use the Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication Web form; see http://creativecommons.org/license/publicdomain-2?lang=en. 2. Retaining some rights while allowing some use. For example, authors may decide to disallow commercial use without permission. Authors may also decide whether to allow users to make modifications (e.g. translations, adaptations) without permission. A good way to make these choices is to use a Creative Commons license. * Go to http://creativecommons.org/license/. * Choose and select a license. * What to do next — you can then e–mail the license html code to yourself. Do this, and then forward that e–mail to First Monday’s editors. Put your name in the subject line of the e–mail with your name and article title in the e–mail. Background information about Creative Commons licenses can be found at http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/. 3. Retaining full rights, including translation and reproduction rights. Authors may use the statement: © Author 2016 All Rights Reserved. Authors may choose to use their own wording to reserve copyright. If you choose to retain full copyright, please add your copyright statement to the end of the article. Authors submitting a paper to First Monday do so in the understanding that Internet publishing is both an opportunity and challenge. In this environment, authors and publishers do not always have the means to protect against unauthorized copying or editing of copyright–protected works.