Is Grafitti By Permission Still Grafitti?

In Longmont there is a property owner that allows graffiti artists to paint on her property so long as they've been approved by her and can tell inquiring police officers the correct password.

Isn't the point of graffiti to be an anti-social, anti-authority message that only an inner circle of friends and foes can read? In the semantic battle of the definition of graffiti as art, this middle ground of permission gives presumably more talented "artists" a forum for their efforts. From the Daily Times-Call article today:

“How many 16-year-olds do you know who’ve been in an art show?” said student Tobias Lopez, whose GIA graffiti work was featured in the Longmont Museum and Cultural Center earlier this month. “We want people to see graffiti as art, not just names on a wall.”

Giving kids a place to display is a good idea but changes the point. Is this still graffiti? Is there any way it keeps other "artists from tagging other property?