I have three stories to relate, and then some questions for debate or comment -
To get to my place of work (in San Francisco), I can take several modes of transportation; and when I take public transportation, there’s a couple ways I can go, so I tend to see various parts of the systems. One morning last year, when I transferred at one station (one of the busiest) I noticed (noticed is probably wrong, it was more like I was bombarded by it) that every single advertising space (wall boards, panels near elevators, etc.) had been bought by a single company. In addition, there were very large stickers on the floor (about 15’ square) at the bottom and top of the stairwells, and every single stair step (of 80 or so) had a sticker on it, plus I think a few more stickers on the floor on the top level. This was not only in the regional train station (BART), but in the light rail station that serves the city as well. At first glance it seemed as though the stations had been completely remodeled. While some of the stickers peeled off in a few days, it got to be so annoying seeing that every time I went there that I stopped transferring at that station and picked another one.
(I went back today to see it again, and those ads are at least gone).
A week ago, I went to another station I don’t often transfer at and found that there, too, a company had bought up all the wall boards (these are the signs that are on the walls across the tracks that you look at while you’re waiting). Not quite so annoying, although I saw that the advertisement was itself – well, not so much offensive as the sort that makes one wish they hadn’t done it quite that way. It was for an online job-hunting/head-hunting service and portrayed potential employees as coming from trees, gumball machines, fishing holes, slot machines, etc. The people are all little faceless suited copies; what I found depressing is that they’re all men. Of course, I don’t know, maybe the online service refuses to help women find jobs … well, that’s the upsetting ad.
One more story, and then some questions.
A few months ago (or maybe further back than that) there was a deal made with a company who would pay millions of dollars in exchange for hanging a banner on the Golden Gate Bridge. While that was the way the story was usually told, they didn’t exactly want to cover the entire bridge, Cristo-like, with their banner; what they wanted to put up was a banner with their logo replacing the one currently over the toll plaza that says “toll plaza” for a period of time (a week or so). Still, it was the Golden Gate Bridge, and after a great hue and cry from the locals, they put an ad in the Chroniminer (or was it that Examicle?) inviting people to comment on what they’d planned. And the idea was quickly shot down.
So my thoughts on this : How much should we allow corporations to pay for/advertise in public places? There is a great deal of money corporations are willing to spend in hopes of making more money, and the money they spend in this kind of advertising generally goes toward things a great number of people use and often supplement tax monies which pay for these things already. Those who manage the public places would never get this kind of money easily, so maybe it’s a good way to get money from corporations to work for the public, so to speak.
Is this a good way for things to work? Is it the best option for these projects, or should there be another way to do it? Specifically, perhaps we might want to let businesses advertise, but not so obtrusively. What are your thoughts on the above scenarios :
-
Should we allow the sort of massive doses like the buying of a whole subway stations’ adds, plus extra adds on top of it? Comapanies are always looking to get people’s attention by doing something a little bit extra, so how much should be allowed?
-
What about advertising that might be considered upsetting, or even in bad taste? Certainly the advertiser has an interest not to engender negative feelings, but should more consideration be put into advertising to public places, as opposed to late-night TV ads?
-
How should local sentiment and feeling of tarnishing local and/or national treasures play into this? The GGB deal had actually been made before many heard about it, even though there was such a strong reaction against it. Should we set aside “advertising-free” zones or do we regulate it well enough already?
I tend to think we need to limit this more than not (although situation #2 perhaps shouldn’t be mandated by the govt.); however, this is seen as a way to keep many public systems viable. As it is, the golden gate bridge isn’t getting much more than a new paint job.
panama jack
I welcome any thoughts, comments, credit card numbers, etc.