As an individual, I'd welcome no advertisements everywhere. I think ads were abused long enough. It's just a leech on the human life.
Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)
71–80 of 428 posts
Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)
#72I disagree with this move. Though advertising is certainly excessive in many cities. They should've kept it, restrict what can be advertised (e.g. no alcohol, drugs, or things that the city deems 'bad') and used the revenue to beautify the city. In any case, Sao Paulo did have too many ads which restricted the view. At the very least that should've been resolved. Though I suppose given HN people will applaud this mov…
I lived there. The adverts were making the city ugly. It was a massive improvement when we got rid of them.
I still live here. I remember how it was before 2007 and the city is now uglier than ever. Seoul has outdoor ads everywhere and looks much nicer.
Ads could have been a source of revenue for the city. Crazy to waste time and effort on stuff like this when the city has much bigger problems.
Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)
#73Alternative script for Carpenter's They Live: He put the sunglasses on and went about his day.
Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)
#74I recently learned Kyoto has rules about signage and specifically color saturation. Some of the rules seem too detailed, but the end result looks very nice. https://youtu.be/KuX3nu4jdo0
Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
They’re not giving up much anyway regardless of their overall level of economic activity. These billboards are not just an eyesore but violate the public space at the expense of everyone else. Should be banned nationally (globally would be great too)
I'm curious - what's something that's not an eyesore? People think art is, graffiti, even buildings, etc. The difference is some of these generates money for governments to solve actual problems, and the others... do not.
One key difference is the scale. You can think of a billboard as really bad graffiti that’s shoved in your face to manipulate you. Graffiti is ugly too (not to be confused with urban art) and should always be removed.
Generating money for the government isn’t something to be concerned with in this context, and most likely a billboard doesn’t generate enough money for the government versus the drain it has on the public sphere. (I’d be shocked to find it worthwhile).
I do think we need architectural standards and thankfully the federal government is looking to implement Greco-Roman architecture as mandatory for federal buildings [1]. Suburban houses for example are really awful architecture and continued research shows this [2]. Tall skyscrapers produce a fight or flight response.
Beauty isn’t in the eye of the beholder. We just don’t have the tools yet to objectively define beauty. The Notre Dame Cathedral is objectively beautiful (this also answers your question about what is not an eyesore) and Boston City Hall is objectively an awful building. You can have an opinion that differs from this but it’s like having an opinion that gravity doesn’t exist. Likewise broad scale highway billboards meant to try and sell you something promote private profit at the public expense and transform otherwise beautiful landscapes into something that is jarring and disfigured.
1] https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/12/23/2020-28... [2] https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/97810030315...
Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)
#76It says that many businesses opposed the change, this could be beneficial for them too. Advertising can be a prisoners dilemma, where all parties end up paying for it and getting the same result as if they all stopped paying for it
Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)
#77Some additions: Stores also cannot use their full façade for advertising. Branding colors and details are OK, but logos cannot be too large (don't know the exact rule). The law is picky. Some stores cheat by having a glass façade, and using LEDs inside that glass. Like this: https://imgur.com/a/CLdUD1C Since this law was adopted, there's been an increase in full building graffiti, which is not banned. Now 10 years la…
Full-building graphite are one of the hallmarks of downtown Belo Horizonte. I remember as a kid seeing some of those impressive, surrealistic images. They made a big impression on me, I wish I knew who the artist(s) was/were.
I particularly loved the art around Praça de Peixe and Carlos Prates. The stuff around Savassi was bigger and more impressive, but somehow more professional and generic.
Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)
#78Ironically, this joke of a website is full of spam…
Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)
#79No outdoor advertising which is acknowledged as such, perhaps.
Advertisers always find ways to ply their trade.
Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)
#80Some additions: Stores also cannot use their full façade for advertising. Branding colors and details are OK, but logos cannot be too large (don't know the exact rule). The law is picky. Some stores cheat by having a glass façade, and using LEDs inside that glass. Like this: https://imgur.com/a/CLdUD1C Since this law was adopted, there's been an increase in full building graffiti, which is not banned. Now 10 years la…
> Since this law was adopted, there's been an increase in full building graffiti
And good art makes people come inside. Not advertisement indeed.