Harold

This essay gives many instances of "pranks" that have occurred in the media world as a form of activism. Commercial "pranksters" rhetorically challenge brands and corporations, in hopes of making them better and not turning into a monopoly. These pranksters, however, are taking the idea too far, and becoming more comedians than social activists.

I don't necessarily agree with the idea of pranking because the pranksters are not only attacking a certain product that they might not agree with, but the brand as a whole. I suppose it becomes a question of whether they are doing that intentionally or not, but I think that maybe sometimes they ruin the reputation of a brand a lot faster than they do a product.

Do parodies have a lot to do with the same idea of pranking? I thought about the Harlem Shake right now, and how it is a form of a parody and how people seem to think it is funny. This takes away from the original Harlem Shake, as many pranks that were mentioned in this article take away from the original brand. Imagine if those pranks on brands went so far that we forgot what logos like the Nike Swoosh are.