Actually, as it turns out, Turner and its marketing firm didn't get permission in Boston, hence the freak-out when someone two weeks after they were put up, finally called the police to report their presence.
I don't have a problem with the early response. I don't even have a problem with the state and city police remaining cautions after they blew up the first Lite Brite. Yes, the one at Sullivan Square was a Lite Brite, but the one on the BU Bridge might not be.
Where I have a problem is that after city officials knew what was going on, they continued to use inflammatory language. They're still using inflammatory language. Now, maybe they're doing it for legal reasons to make sure Turner pays the hell up for the inconvenience (and let me make it clear: Turner should pay restitution and civil fines for the stunt — and given the very early and public apologies issued by the company I suspect they will), but it's the day after.
Honestly? What I'm actually upset about is that the two artists are being charged at all. They were hired to do a job, which they did. They are not responsible for Turner's or the marketing firm's fuck-up and they shouldn't be blamed for it. I think most people rallying to support the artists agree that Turner does need to suck it up and pay the penalties, so I think a lot of the tittering is part relief, part feeling stupid that we were dealing with Lite Brites.
Re: But they *could* have been bombs...
I don't have a problem with the early response. I don't even have a problem with the state and city police remaining cautions after they blew up the first Lite Brite. Yes, the one at Sullivan Square was a Lite Brite, but the one on the BU Bridge might not be.
Where I have a problem is that after city officials knew what was going on, they continued to use inflammatory language. They're still using inflammatory language. Now, maybe they're doing it for legal reasons to make sure Turner pays the hell up for the inconvenience (and let me make it clear: Turner should pay restitution and civil fines for the stunt — and given the very early and public apologies issued by the company I suspect they will), but it's the day after.
Honestly? What I'm actually upset about is that the two artists are being charged at all. They were hired to do a job, which they did. They are not responsible for Turner's or the marketing firm's fuck-up and they shouldn't be blamed for it. I think most people rallying to support the artists agree that Turner does need to suck it up and pay the penalties, so I think a lot of the tittering is part relief, part feeling stupid that we were dealing with Lite Brites.