HomeNewsTrendsFeaturesWhat happened with the Messi murals that kicked up a storm on social media?

What happened with the Messi murals that kicked up a storm on social media?

Budweiser India in April invited ire when it painted murals of much-loved football icon Lionel Messi over street art in the national and financial capitals of India - but should street art even be protected? If so, who should protect it and are there rules and laws for it?

May 01, 2021 / 06:30 IST
Story continues below Advertisement
Budweiser India got this Messi mural painted on Chapel Road, Mumbai (Image credit: Shubham Dahiya).
Budweiser India got this Messi mural painted on Chapel Road, Mumbai (Image credit: Shubham Dahiya).

In March-April, some long-standing murals in Mumbai and Delhi - either done by or organised by Bollywood Art Project (BAP) and St+art India Foundation, respectively - disappeared overnight. They were overpainted with murals of Argentinian footballer Lionel Messi for a campaign by the India office of beer brand Budweiser. St+art called out the alcohol giant on Instagram for painting over murals by artists Okudart and Stencilcity to create "billboards" and for "hijacking the street art scene in India". Following the backlash, the brand agreed to take down the Messi art and restore the works done by St+art, an NGO that promotes street art in India, and BAP, helmed by artist Ranjit Dahiya. (As of April 30, 2021, Budweiser India communications team said that the Delhi murals had been taken down, while work was in progress to remove the Mumbai mural.)

While some dubbed St+art's challenge to Budweiser a big win for the street art community, a few did not approve of one brand "cancelling out" another brand, as evidenced from the comments on St+art's Instagram post:

Story continues below Advertisement

"How dare they remove someone's work without permission?" one asked.

"(This street art) has been up since 2013, implies that it has served its purpose and the artist got celebrated for it. Just because Bud is a big corp does not deny them right to use this space (sic)," another argued.