Is corporate ownership a prerequisite for advertising? How about advertising the un-advertised?
Anyone who sells anything knows the importance of advertising. So they put up signs. Even a wayside boutique will have a sign indicating what’s there to be bought or explaining why it is imperative that the passerby should stop.
That’s different from ads in the mainstream media and social media. Not everyone can buy ads. Not everyone can pocket out bucks to boost a page.
There are no ads for king coconut (thambili). No ads for mallun. None for kola-kenda. Wayside boutiques that serve hot pol-roti with alakola, nai-miris, bimmal or polos, followed by beli-mal.
Handicrafts. No ads. Not for wayside shops that have mats, masks and other wall ornaments. None for thelijja. None for kevum, kokis, helapa.
Sure, we have the gift shops and some of them come in chains. They have facebook pages. They advertise on instagram, they tweet, they even advertise in mainstream media. Not your random craftsman. Not the archchi who sells bulath. Not the couple offering pol-roti and beli-mal.
There are no ads imploring people to grow turmeric. None asking people to grow a chili plant before complaining about the state, the grama niladhari and everyone on earth not helping them. None saying that most people can but don’t plant a coconut tree. None saying that kiri-hodi has curative properties since coconut is good, turmeric is good, tamarind is good. None urging people to explore the virtue of civic responsibility. None suggesting that there should be an ad saying ‘most ads suck as much as the products and brands they promote.’
Is corporate ownership a prerequisite for advertising?
Let’s advertise the un-advertised. How about it?