I have no interest in yelling at you or calling you stupid, and I don't appreciate the assumption. As for your "secret hope," more ad folks will become more media literate--Unless you've met a vast majority of ad folks, you're showing a prejudice that is quite myopic.

While we're on the subject of literacy, there is nothing in this Gawker article that Naomi Klein and Adbusters haven't already covered, ad nauseam except theirs was more thought out, less Juvenalian, and less out to shock and enrage for clickbait's sake. I still disagree with all of them, of course, but at least the previous iterations were better informed and less geared toward the echo chamber, not to mention they didn't include Hitler.

"These are contrarian points that should be considered legitimate complaints if a small, noisy section of the audience is firmly behind them. Their snark posts are based within their voice."

And I would argue in this case that the size of the audience is proportional to the validity of their complaints. Judging by the number of people who did not in fact applaud the stunt or ensuing article, the noisy minority of anti-advertising elitists is nothing more than that. And if a justification for a co-called respected media outlet to troll a brand's bot because 8Chan would have done it first-- that's not really much of a justification is it.

However, I do think you are more correct than you realize with this point. It clearly is a dick move that 8Chan would have done first. And nothing more. If the rambling article/apologia/justification that followed didn't convince me or the majority of people, than it only proves my point.

Asking me to overlook the usual Gawker Media slime from their Real Journalists™ is akin to asking me to read Playboy for the articles. While the articles may once upon a time tried to legitimize the magazine and mitigate to a certain extent the soft-core pornography content in late 1950's America, the magazine's brand and lifestyle has and will always be associated with bunnies and centerfolds. There may be great writers there--I don't care enough to investigate, and that wasn't the point of the article. I already know roses can grow in a pile of shit, but at the end of the day it's still a pile of shit the rose is growing in.

Gawker media's yellow journalism and shock-value and crass attitude is its brand voice. I'm not interested in legitimizing that brand or entertaining it on any level.

Moreover, I am not rushing to Coke's defense so much as pointing out that Gawker's brand is better known for pulling dick moves while shilling Yellow Journalism than any sort of tome that is crackling with intelligence and inspiration.

It's not necessarily that it's a private location, they just didn't tell us. I will say because the ad was made in Canada it is most likely somewhere in Canada.