Blogs Mar 4, 2010 at 1:31 pm

In Favor of Ads on Public Transit

Paul Constant
Back to article

Comments

1
Ads in public places contribute hugely to urbanism. When you're walking around in public, you're in a commercial space. Ads tell us what other people are interested in. Real cities have ads not just on and in their buses, but on phone booths and special kiosks throughout the commercial areas. I was just in San Francisco, and they have large round ad kiosks EVERYWHERE, just like they do in London, Paris, and New York.

Businesses should be encouraged to put up bigger, better, and more numerous signs, too. It's a city, not a goddamn park.
Fnarf on March 4, 2010 at 1:41 PM Report this
2
Sheesh, more "real city" BS. Seattle is a real city, you fucking insecure bellyachers.
Matt from Denver on March 4, 2010 at 1:46 PM Report this
3
If those ads help pay for effective public transit, advertise away.
Amnt on March 4, 2010 at 1:46 PM Report this
4
Ads in an underground subway definitely captivate more than those on the surface. Our ad-riddled mental nether regions are strangely at peace gazing at ads in the bowels of the city.
jabberinjibbinfibbin&adlibbin on March 4, 2010 at 1:50 PM Report this
5
How about the ads in the Washington DC Metro for the F-22 and Boeing Tankers and other stuff we can't buy?
on March 4, 2010 at 1:50 PM Report this
6
Does anyone know why our transit (subway and above ground) stations aren't commercially robust areas like most other mass transit system I've been on around the world? I don't mean around the station...I mean inside. Some of the more active stations even have full blown 7Eleven-esque places, which is really convenient.
shotsix on March 4, 2010 at 1:55 PM Report this
7
yup the Scandie ikea influence is deep, it favors antiseptic bland spaces, nothing screaming, nothing foodish, no food on street, etc.

in nyc they have oyster bar in train station too.

we didn't need public art for $300,000 a pop. we needed posters advertising movies and bands and shit.
on March 4, 2010 at 1:55 PM Report this
8
Paul? What?

You want ads? But not ads? You want special ads? Or regular ads but only in special places? Never mind. I don't want to know.
elenchos on March 4, 2010 at 1:59 PM Report this
9
Fnarf clearly thinks that, if you're not in Times Square (or maybe Tokyo) with ads in every conceivable direction, you're not in a "real city." Frankly, I find that garish and obnoxious, and if that's what it means to be in a "real city," I'm happy I'm not in one.

I don't have any problem with ads on public transit, though.
Fifty-Two-Eighty on March 4, 2010 at 2:04 PM Report this
10
I actually like how every other month or so one advertiser will entirely take over my BART station and blanket the place with floor, wall, and stair ads. It's not always inspired, but it's always colorful, it's something to look at, and generates a few bucks.
Dougsf on March 4, 2010 at 2:08 PM Report this
11
@2, yes, it is -- despite the best efforts of the bluenoses and scolds who have run it for the last hundred years.
Fnarf on March 4, 2010 at 2:37 PM Report this
12
@9, everything's black or white with you, isn't it? It's either Times Square or sign-free Redmond, nothing in between. This is the argument that's been used to sanitize and dull our city for a century -- if you allow any ad anywhere in public you've committed "Times Square". That's patently ridiculous.
.
Fnarf on March 4, 2010 at 2:46 PM Report this
13
I don't mind most of the ads. I do hate the odious buswrap - even with the view stripe (like the new bright green ones with the Clear ads).
on March 4, 2010 at 2:49 PM Report this
14
This topic reminds me of the scene in "Brazil" where Sam and Jill are driving down the highway and there's nothing but a solid wall of advertisement billboards on both sides of the road.
Urgutha Forka on March 4, 2010 at 2:53 PM Report this
15
There is still a strong mentality among Seattle advertisers that only poor people ride transit.
Mr John on March 4, 2010 at 3:01 PM Report this
16
@6,

At the San Francisco Caltrain stop, the beverage/snack/newspaper kiosk was selling liquor. It blew me away.
keshmeshi on March 4, 2010 at 3:32 PM Report this
17
@15 - True: I have a wealthy Mexican friend who won't ride buses because he thinks people will assume he's a day laborer.

Oddly, that stigma doesn't extend to streetcars and trains. Go figure.
Free Lunch on March 4, 2010 at 3:35 PM Report this
18
@6: You need enough riders to support it. One hopes the day will come, but we're not close yet.

That said, I'm not sure how easy I want to make it for people to bring fast-food containers and drinks on the trains. They could become high-speed trash cans pretty quick. That's one of the reasons the Washington D.C Metro is so clean.
bigyaz on March 5, 2010 at 11:49 AM Report this
19
If companies are aloud to legally invade the public sphere with bullshit advertisements then I'm legally obliged to cover them up with graffiti.
mammal on March 6, 2010 at 6:32 PM Report this
20
What about Sao Paulo's experiment with banning ALL outdoor advertising, the 2007 Clean City Law? Popular with the residents, not so much with Clear Channel. https://www.adbusters.org/magazine/73/Sa…
on March 9, 2010 at 3:11 PM Report this
21
Some things to note. First, ST has a policy of not putting up ads or wrapping vehicles right at the beginning of a new service, as a means of establishing the brand. This makes sense to me, and it might be why the ads are slow to ramp up. Also, you know, the economy might be biting into some of advertising purchasing power of local businesses.

Secondly, the City of Seattle has an outdoor advertising ban. It's the reason why those automatic toilets cost us an arm and a leg: every other city in the world just contracts with an ad company; the ad company does all the dirty work like buying and maintaining the toilets, and both parties make money from the advertising revenue. Since the ban precluded that option here, the City bought and maintained the things itself, which was a miserable failure.

And San Francisco recently got brand new bus shelters bought and maintained by Clear Channel in exchange for the right to advertise on the side of them. Up here? Metro's pulling out shelters wherever there's not high enough ridership because they can't afford to maintain them.

People need to start complaining to the city about the outdoor advertising ban. Other cities have managed to allow advertising on bus shelters, ad kiosks, and automatic toilets without magically being covered in millions of billboards. The City Council should rewrite Seattle's law to be more like the law in those cities. Yes, there will be more ads. But maybe our bus fares won't go up $0.50 every year.
on March 10, 2010 at 5:15 PM Report this

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview
Posted by (your name here)

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.

Editors' Picks

The Mayor Promises to Fill 20 Vacant Storefronts Downtown
Why Gen X Sucks
How Writing for The Stranger Made Me Blacker
A Marxist Analysis of Seattle's Bad Light Rail Behavior
Food Fighters
Seattle Does Not Have a Spending Problem, Big Business Has a Greed Problem
The Stranger
is a proud member of the media network
Masthead Ad Info & Rates Jobs at The Stranger Contact Privacy Policy Terms of Use Takedown Policy Find The Stranger Near You
Support The Stranger
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134