"No man is an island." I'm not saying that anyone acts autonomously. But I'm saying that ascribing creative powers to corporations or nations does a disservice to the real individuals who made the real work and made the real objects. Corporations are ways for people to act in tandem, and to act efficiently and produce at scale; it has never been a way to be creative - that's why "creatives" and R&D departments are largely autonomous from the larger corporation.
The art market is a market. It changes at the whims of artists, gallerists and collectors, that is, at the whims of collections of individuals, not the other way around. The people who try to "game" the art market always lose.
Successful decoration and propaganda eludes regular corporate production or formula, and that is why both businesses and governments turn to so-called "talent" (business parlance for creative individuals) to make it.
Seduction and feeding have nothing to do with manifest destiny, which is the belief in dominating the U.S. West. And feeding and seduction pre-exists any notion of business or nation.
Lastly, don't confuse what an individual creates to what history makes possible. History doesn't create (no more than corporations or businesses), but the creations of others in history provides the bedrock for everyone that follows. It was an individual that invented the telephone. It was a small group of academics that invented the internet. It was two hobbyists that built Apple. It was one individual that invented blogging, and one individual that invented LiveJournal. Six Apart, AT&T and Apple came after the individuals, and brought economies of scale, making the production of those things efficient and economically feasible. But individuals build companies and nations, and it will always remain individuals who do the actual creating.
My point is simply that nations and corporations do NOT create art, any more than history creates art; individuals create art and compose nations, corporations, and history.
My second, and minor, point is that art is partially defined against the product that corporations sell.
Corporations hire people to make packaging, commercials, etc., and the argument can be made that it is art, but it is no more created by the corporation then the telephone, the internet, LiveJournal, or the Mona Lisa. Production is NOT the same as creation.
Think of it this way: until the last few hundred years, every artist directly or indirectly worked for the church. But we know that the church didn't paint The Death of St. Peter Martyr, Titian did. Likewise, we know that Sony didn't make the video for Daft Punk's "Around the World," Michel Gondry did.