Given the choice between looking at ads and being assaulted by the hideousness of rusted, empty signs, I think I'd take the ads.
A Happy, Flourishing City With No Advertising
61–70 of 122 posts
Re: A Happy, Flourishing City With No Advertising
#62Dislike. Advertising is what gives cities their unique visual culture. We associate different typographic 'looks' with different cities. Where would Miami be without its bold, ostentatious signage? Where would New York City be without its iconic frankin gothic and gotham centered visual culture?
Sao Paulo has also recently (2 years?) banned smoking indoors, you do get through a lot of smoke while walking on the street but you don't have to think before going inside a bar or restaurant, better quality of life I guess.
Re: A Happy, Flourishing City With No Advertising
#63Next, see if we can ban people from using ALL CAPS in emails and forum posts. :)
Re: A Happy, Flourishing City With No Advertising
#64I wonder what the comments here would look like if the ban would have been on a different advertising medium, say, online advertising.
I'd be willing to bet the great majority here would oppose it, and I'd be willing to bet that people would be exploring all of the negative and potential unintended consequences.
Have you considered the immediate losses advertisers will incur from removing/destroying their advertising assets? Will those costs be passed on to customers? What about the "public" cost of implementing and enforcing the ban itself? What effect does this have on companies that sell outdoor ads? Does this concentrate power to companies that sell other types of advertising and reduce competition? Does this lower the value of real estate properties that previously sold ad space? What happens to people who previously discovered or visited businesses via outdoor ads? What about the people who actually enjoy the ads?
On a deeper level, why stop at banning outdoor ads? Should we ban other things we find aesthetically unpleasing or is there something about these outdoor ads that was materially damaging people? Also, how exactly do you determine if this ban was a "success"?
Re: A Happy, Flourishing City With No Advertising
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've had the same problem in areas where business signage is strictly regulated. It's harder to find the place you're looking for when the only sign is very low to the ground and unobtrusive, and you can't see it until you're right on top of it.
Clearly that doesn't stop the mail being delivered to these businesses. Using their address as a navigational aid would seem to suffice. That does not address the business concern of capturing new business via signage, but the whole point here is that urban dwellers also have legitimate concerns and that private business interest should yield when reasonable collective concerns are being addressed. [edit: in fact, th…
Not everywhere has convenient street address systems!
Re: A Happy, Flourishing City With No Advertising
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
Kinkos doesn't need a sign above their store telling me it's a copy shop, nor does Tim Hortons need a billboard in the air above their local franchise telling me they sell coffee and donuts; they've successfully gotten that information to me in other mediums that are less visually intrusive upon my neighbourhood. But I frequent the Campus copy shop, not Kinkos, and their name "Campus Copy Shop" seems relatively unamb…
> they've successfully gotten that information to me in other mediums How nice for you - and even nicer for those places with large advertising budgets. But that is not the case for everyone. I don't need a huge billboard above a shop. But some ads that show what they do are quite helpful. > "Campus Copy Shop" So you suggest that all shops name themself as basically what they do? And what about a grocery store that h…
While I see your argument, I myself would enjoy a trip back in time where you would simply ask a local if they knew somewhere you could make a copy.
There's no getting around the fact that socializing with the locals is inconvenient, but sometimes it can be a nice inconvenience.
It has the added benefit that if your business pisses off the locals (crappy service perhaps) they'll probably recommend a competitor if there is one.
Re: A Happy, Flourishing City With No Advertising
#67I actually enjoy advertising in the city, especially '90s-style neons, bus stop billboards, and those illegally plastered on construction site fences. I feel like I'm the only person who does. It makes the city look vibrant, and often covers up some of the... less successful architectural experiments.
I love the images of the Hong Kong streets that are just seas of neon and flashing lights. And walking through does give a sense of excitement for no real reason that fireworks also makes us happy.
I think there is scope for banning of large scale ads in certain locations. When you walk through a tourist town that is, for want of a better word 'quaint' because of old buildings or similar, it's nice when they restrict the erection of modern advertising.
I think it's a case of horses for courses. In some places it works well, in others, not necessary. As long as the residents of the location can decide which way they want to go, I don't see an issue.
Re: A Happy, Flourishing City With No Advertising
#68IMO cables are much uglier than ads, but nobody else seems to notice or care for them. Most of them resemble this one: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2170/2056763887_4157b7a3a2.jp...
The worst things about cables is that they prevent the growth of large trees. Adding trees back into areas does far more for improving street beauty than removing advertising.
Re: A Happy, Flourishing City With No Advertising
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
They said the same thing about technological advancements during the industrial revolution...
Bzzzt! Wrong. This is not a technical innovation. This is government regulation of a market.
Not all government regulations are bad. The worst thing anyone can do in support of free markets is somehow insist that there should be no government regulations.
We have regulations on vehicle drive-by noise limits. Yes, this costs consumers and manufacturers. But overall, it is a net gain as it results in a quieter society, which is better. Visual pollution is just as bad as noise pollution.
It's a sensible move for people to adopt if they choose to do so.
I actually think it would be broadly neutral. A lot of value invested in advertising is actually wasted. So redistributing that back into the economy may turn out to be marginally beneficial. For every signwriter that had to get a new job, perhaps a magazine editor, online ad creator or telephone sales operator got a job. Or perhaps the companies that saved in constructing advertising changed to improving their products instead.
It will always be impossible to know. But don't argue that all government regulation is wrong.
Re: A Happy, Flourishing City With No Advertising
#70I actually enjoy advertising in the city, especially '90s-style neons, bus stop billboards, and those illegally plastered on construction site fences. I feel like I'm the only person who does. It makes the city look vibrant, and often covers up some of the... less successful architectural experiments.
You're not alone. If I want a place free of visual clutter then I head outside the city. But advertising is a form of speech, and without it I would feel silenced. Corporate propaganda is similar political graffiti: sure you can make a case against it, but the principle of free speech should outweigh all objections. So yeah, public advertising gives me the warm fuzzies too.