14 ms·

A Happy, Flourishing City With No Advertising

• jacoblyles 15y ago
  Looks like a Stalinesque ghost town.
  • westbywest 15y ago
    As per the small handful of photos included in the blog. Recent Sao Paulo photos on Flickr would suggest otherwise. http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=S%C3%A3o+Paulo&s=rec http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=S%C3%A3o+Paulo&s=rec
  • zorked 15y ago
    São Paulo is one of the ugliest cities ever created by man. Being a Stalinesque ghost town is a huge step up from what they were before. (and you only thought it looked like a ghost town because the pictures didn't include people in them)
• alextp 15y ago
  Indeed, after living in são paulo for a while going anywhere else in brazil lead to a slight culture shock. In a sense this didn't hurt advertisers at all, as the demand for advertisement stayed exactly the same, they just had to change the available media. Think of it as a prisoner's dillema-like situation, where defecting is plastering a huge sign in front of people. It's better for everyone if nobody does that, but whoever breaks the law and does it can get an advantage. Preventing people from defecting in these situations is exactly the point of a government (regardless of how much I disagree with Kassab's actual politics and would never vote for him).
  • jt2190 15y ago
    Are you sure that the policy wasn't designed to transfer control of the outdoor advertising industry to a subset of advertisers? You know... ban advertising, and kill off the existing outdoor-ad only companies. Then reintroduce outdoor advertising, granting permits only to some group of "respectable" advertisers. I'm not saying that this is the case here, but it's a fair question, I think. [Edit: Here is an older but more-balanced article from the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5355692.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5355692.stm]
    • kawera 15y ago
      A fair question for sure but it wasn't the case in São Paulo.
      • Calamitous 15y ago
        Actually, another commenter has pointed out that the government has started displaying ads on buses and inside trains.
        • kawera 15y ago
          Not really. The ban doesn't apply to indoor ads so isn't applicable to the metro's trains or stations. As for the buses, they aren't displaying ads at all.
          • rufibarbatus 15y ago
            Buses are pretty much ads on wheels, --- and in some buses of the green variety [1] there are TV sets broadcasting most relevant content such as government propaganda, the horoscope, news and events, and yes, advertisement. [1] I'm yet to figure out what the colours mean on buses.
            • alextp 15y ago
              Regarding [1], each bus company has a different color. The companies won different government contracts for different parts of the city, so the east side is roughly red, the south blue, the north-west green, etc.
            • kawera 15y ago
              Buses in SP have no exterior ads. There are ads inside most of then. The law regulates exterior ads only.
• jxcole 15y ago
  I would be interested to see before and after shots. Was their advertising problem really so bad or was just about the same as any other city? Edit: Found one: http://banbillboardblight.org/?page_id=4251 http://banbillboardblight.org/?page_id=4251
  • jobu 15y ago
    So they didn't eliminate all signage, but it was rather dramatically reduced. I grew up in a suburb of Minneapolis that had similar restrictions on advertising, and I can say that it is very nice as a resident. Now when I visit however, I find it difficult to locate some of the new businesses. I'm curious how this law has affected business revenue from tourists in Sao Paulo.
    • DanielRibeiro 15y ago
      It really affected the advertising business. On the other hand, it actually spurred the Indoor media business (such as Elemedia[1, which installs on business buildings monitors that display ads, beside the occasional news/weather info). [1] http://www.elemidia.com.br/ http://www.elemidia.com.br/
      • rufibarbatus 15y ago
        I'm curious about how your experience compares to mine: more often than not (say four times a week?) I see at least one of those indoor media terminals blue-screen dead. At any rate, their content is 100% generic (the only exception I ever saw was at the Daslu megastore's elevators). Doing indoor media "right" seems to be a yet unsolved problem in São Paulo. And still I'm not sure how relevant these terminals are in the smartphone- and tabled-filled environments they're usually spotted.
    • ams6110 15y ago
      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.
• spindritf 15y ago
  I 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.
  • dconway 15y ago
    You're not the only one. The ads are often funny, or beautiful. Flashing lights (in my opinion) help give cities that city feeling.
  • brc 15y ago
    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.
  • botker 15y ago
    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.
    • ericingram 15y ago
      great point
    • rayiner 15y ago
      Do you live in the city?
• OstiaAntica 15y ago
  Vermont has similar rules restricting signage on state roadways, and it adds to the state's charm.
  • schiffern 15y ago
    I wonder how many traffic accidents the law prevents. The copy on roadside billboards is about as long as a text message, but while texting and driving is outlawed in 35 states, only 4 states have outlawed roadside billboards (Vermont, Maine, Hawaii, and Alaska).
• KleinmanB 15y ago
  This also should happen for banner ads.
• __david__ 15y ago
  I think this is pretty common in surburbia. My little corner of the world has banned billboards and tall signs for the past 40 years (and I happen to think it's for the best, but that may be just because I'm used to it).
• kinow 15y ago
  I was born and live in Sao Paulo, and this law (Lei Cidade Limpa) really helped to reduce the visual pollution here. Here are some links for pictures of before/after. For more images, you can search for images of Lei Cidade Limpa SP or Lei Cidade Limpa São Paulo (we use the tilde here, you can remove it if you prefer) http://www.flickr.com/photos/tonydemarco/sets/72157600075508212/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/tonydemarco/sets/72157600075508... http://www.flickr.com/photos/sueluzfotos/page4/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/sueluzfotos/page4/ http://ftorquato.wordpress.com/2008/08/26/gilberto-kassab-dem/ http://ftorquato.wordpress.com/2008/08/26/gilberto-kassab-de... And here's a link with a article in Sao Paulo prefecture about this law (google-translated to English). http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=pt&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.prefeitura.sp.gov.br%2Fportal%2Fa_cidade%2Fnoticias%2Findex.php%3Fp%3D14184 http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=pt&tl... Cheers, -B
• rhygar 15y ago
  The cost of this is a loss of jobs for sign makers (and their suppliers), marketing agencies, and a loss of income for new businesses (and their suppliers) that want to make their presence known. Basically, the economy in that city is worse off overall as a result, and there are fewer jobs to go around.
  • wr1472 15y ago
    They said the same thing about technological advancements during the industrial revolution...
    • rhygar 15y ago
      Bzzzt! Wrong. This is not a technical innovation. This is government regulation of a market.
      • mshron 15y ago
        ... where there are serious externalities. Isn't this where government regulation is most suited?
        • rhygar 15y ago
          What externalities? What material harm is caused by putting up a sign, beyond "I disapprove of it"?
          • cmdrreiki 15y ago
            Poor aesthetics cause psychological harm through both distraction and pure ugliness. I shouldn't have to combat decades of scientific research on attention-stealing simply to maintain my train of thought as I walk down the street.
            • rhygar 15y ago
              Admit it - you have no evidence other than anecdotes to prove that signs cause material harm, and therefore externalities. This is government red tape that hurts the economy in that city.
• eaurouge 15y ago
  Speaking of distracting advertising, the massive, bright LCD screens on 101 (here in the valley) are an accident or two waiting to happen.
• mekoka 15y ago
  It's certainly an interesting concept if well applied, but I'm not sure it's suitable for all cities. For example, I have a hard time imagining Las Vegas without all the neons and signs.
  • jarek 15y ago
    This is because there's nothing else to look at in Las Vegas other than the neons.
• hanskuder 15y ago
  I've always seen advertising as a game of iterated prisoner's dilemma. If every business cooperated and agreed to not advertise, consumers would still be able to seek and find products and services they wanted, and businesses wouldn't need to spend money on ads. As soon as one business started to buy ads, however, they'd have an immense advantage and competitors would quickly follow suit. So as soon as one business stops cooperating and starts advertising, the entire market devolves into the equilibrium we see today: our lives are completely saturated with ads. The fact that business can carry on as usual when everyone is forced to cooperate in Sao Paulo shows that advertising is mostly a huge inefficiency.
• swah 15y ago
  IMO 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.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2170/2056763887_4157b7a3a2.jp...
  • brc 15y ago
    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.
  • glassx 15y ago
    This one is an extreme case, but I agree with you. I live in Belo Horizonte, another large brazilian metropolis 580 kilometers away from Sao Paulo, and all the cabling is underground in the whole downtown area. And it's not just the looks, in the five years I lived in this area I never had a blackout caused by storms. Had to buy several UPS units after moving to a suburb.
• mickdarling 15y ago
  Once augmented reality apps become more common I can imagine this becoming more popular. If you are a tourist and want to find stuff, or just see the ads you would be able to load up the ads layer and maybe even get discounts for your trouble. If you want to just see the architectural facades as they were meant to be seen, then no tech required. I would love to see Vegas or New York, for instance, with the ads scrubbed and then be able to pull up dynamic ads with a phone or heads up display.
• rickyconnolly 15y ago
  Dislike. 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?
  • spodek 15y ago
    I remember hearing things like this before the indoor smoking ban a few years ago. People said it was part of what bars and clubs were for. In particular, New York City establishments said people who came in from the suburbs and brought money in would stop coming in. The ban was successful. A year or two later Hoboken passed a ban because people were increasingly going into the city for the cleaner indoor air they couldn't get in Hoboken. As a New Yorker of over two decades, I'd love to see such a ban here, perhaps with some areas, like Times Square, zoned to allow it. As with smoking, I expect a large majority would support it once implemented.
    • r00fus 15y ago
      Which is to say, some places like Las Vegas might not want to implement it. However, it is the purview of government to legislate things like this to establish protection of the "commons".
    • vl 15y ago
      Hah, ironically Times Square is already zoned other way around - when new building owner wanted to reduce number of the billboards on the building, they couldn't because city quickly passed regulation to keep them up.
  • emp_ 15y ago
    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.
  • rayiner 15y ago
• bokchoi 15y ago
  One of the links from that page led me to this mini-documentary which was quite interesting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1Nmnv0Ospg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1Nmnv0Ospg
• algorithms 15y ago
  Wow. Just two days ago I wondered how the world would look like without being plastered with every kind of advertisment. I have to say I am so sick of going through my city and being bombarded with attention suckers from every direction. Same thing on the internet when I'm trying to read an article that is left aligned, makes up 20% of my monitor width and has blinking ads all around it. I AM SICK OF IT. I would love to see a new movement to lower the amount of ads we are faced with each day and give us back our ability to concentrate on what's really important.
  • mattgreenrocks 15y ago
    Without advertising, we'd forced to know ourselves better...and there are few things more terrifying than that.
• jwwest 15y ago
  Given the choice between looking at ads and being assaulted by the hideousness of rusted, empty signs, I think I'd take the ads.
  • kawera 15y ago
    This law passed a few years ago and there were empty signs for a few months afterwards. They are all gone now.
• teyc 15y ago
  Next, see if we can ban people from using ALL CAPS in emails and forum posts. :)
• jeffem 15y ago
  I 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"?
  • kawera 15y ago
    * Also, how exactly do you determine if this ban was a "success"? * Before the vote, polls indicated that the majority of "paulistanos" wanted the ban. Now, 5 years later, a poll done by a local paper showed that over 90% of residents approuve the results and want it to continue.
  • forensic 15y ago
    You're spreading FUD. The public doesn't need focus groups and rigorous experimental studies to know that it values a clean city free of visual pollution. it just needs to vote for it. Where are the studies showing that visual clutter benefits everyone? Oh ya that's right nobody asked for studies because "benefitting everyone" is low priority next to silencing the voice of the public to ensure no obstacles to the corporations that rape our world.
• mml 15y ago
  I talked with a startup that wanted to project ads on your car's back window. I asked them if they planned on measuring their revenue in blood.
• nsgf 15y ago
  A similar operation is ongoing (?) in Athens ATM. http://www.illegalsigns.gov.gr/?p=611 http://www.illegalsigns.gov.gr/?p=611 The even made an iPhone app for reporting those things. Everyone got thrilled at first, but now it looks like it's grinding to a halt (econ. crisis and all). The city is indeed cleaner (at least the main avenues). Also, we had many road accidents involving drunk drivers hitting on those huge ad poles (now, at least, somebody might have a chance for survival hitting something else other than metal).
• rufibarbatus 15y ago
  In the simplest terms, this bill: - outlawed billboards anywhere, period - regulated the size of "corporate totems" (such as McDonald's distinctive pole thing with their logo) - regulated the size and number of times one can use corporate branding on their business's façade It's also important to note that sites that had been protected by previous acts as cultural heritage are exempt from this bill, which means we still have a few (rather charming) exceptions around. São Paulo wasn't horribly polluted by billboards to begin with, compared to every other large city. This bill, on the other hand, had such extreme impact... we grew used to it very quickly.
• ericingram 15y ago
  Why don't they regulate away poverty, while they're at it? I look forward to the future, when citizens realize their government is the biggest barrier between themselves and prosperity.
  • rayiner 15y ago
    People come together, through the government, to stop unwanted advertising. The law works, and the people are happy. Ericingram bitches about how the government is the biggest barrier to prosperity. -_-
  • cageface 15y ago
    I look foreward to a future in which humanity has evolved beyond simpleminded black & white thinking.
  • jarek 15y ago
    As we all know, it's the poor who benefit the most from the business of placing and maintaining billboards and other ads. /s
• minikomi 15y ago
  My mind just did a barrel roll trying to imagine Tokyo with no signage. I remember being here for a few days and being mentally overwhelmed with the constant information spew.
• vishaldpatel 15y ago
  What a boring idea.
• silentscope 15y ago
  Havana, Cuba is the same way. I love it and I hope to God some city in the US takes the plunge.
• bala79 15y ago
  visual pollutions makes a big distraction on roads, technically they are one of the reason for road accidents.
• kansface 15y ago
  I spent about a month in Sao Paulo on short notice so I spoke basically no Portuguese. Consequently, I found the city extremely difficult to navigate- both in terms of finding specific destinations and in the hunter/gatherer sense. I imagine big signs would have been of benefit to me since I understand pictures, logos, and studied Latin so I can comprehend way more in writing than in speech. Even large, indoor shopping centers are not obvious for someone in my position... how can you tell a shopping center from an office building when people aren't making huge purchases? I should also mention I didn't have a smart phone with me. I'm sure this move could not have been a net positive for business. Whether the trade off is worth it for locals is another matter entirely.