(link)
"'We are not going to comment further on the videos other than to say it appears the goal of these individuals was to mislead the public; and in the process they wasted valuable resources,' the DNR statement said. 'That’s unfortunate and doesn’t warrant further comment.'"Okay new rule: "generating a conversation" is no justification for an artwork. And all the other various PR speak of "raising awareness" "critical discussions" or whatever various cliches excusing art that gadflies into consciousness. A wooden splinter raises awareness of your thumb, stupidly. These PR cliches that we begin to think in, think of art as, the same blanket excuse attempted in recent controversies like Schutz's painting or the gallows displayed in the art museum's park "beginning a conversation"; this odd belief in art's inherent morality like a get-out-of-jail-free card like all those youtubers yelling "it's just a prank" and art's claim to "It's an artwork." A more interesting question than of real and fake is at what point something is an artwork and at what point its just people behaving disingenuously in the public sphere.