Can somebody explain this to me?
Why do people hate billboards so much? I feel like I must be missing something, because I just don’t get it. Who cares if there’s a billboard on the Bridge? And what does this have to do with the East Bay Regional Parks? I’m so confused!
Get Updates
Newest Comments
- len raphael: Unconfirmed that MJQ laid off 100 employees today, blaming RDA court case. How much did she and the CC waste in legal fees betting against Jerry’s lawyers?
- ralph: No, Livegreen, Occupy Oakland is doing plenty good. They are the poster children for the new, “This is Your Brain on Dope” Campaign.
- Livegreen: They seem to b determined to shut down Oakland and little else. They’ve forgotten Wall St. I can’t help but think the Officers who were preventing them from breaking in to City Hall could have spent...
- gregory mcconnell: The Occupest disrupted City Hall today. They managed to make it difficult, but not impossible, to go into City Hall. They demanded that people who accosted cops on Wednesday should be released. I was out...
- livegreen: I watched the M-Y mtg last night, & it was painful. Jose is a nice guy, but he has difficulty running a meeting that gets anything done. They debated for about 1 hour whether they should discuss recommendations...
- len raphael: The murder of 5 year old Gabriel Martinez. Got a call from an acquaintance who lives in East O and often gets supper at his family’s taco stand. She asked where she can sign up to help on the recall.
- Ravi: I’m sure that all of those Quan diehards (“a recall would be a waste of time and too expensive”) are very gratified that this lovely and deserving woman is having such a good time. No doubt they prefer...
- len raphael: JQ “”I’m actually having a lot of fun,” she said after rehashing many of the lower moments from her first year in office.” “http://www.insidebayare a.com/news/ci_19651889R...
- Ravi: And regarding police reform and the crime thing, Judge Henderson could decide to put OPD under Federal jurisdiction because the terms of the NSA haven’t been fulfilled by the City Administration. Those folks in City...
- len raphael: Harbinger of things to come to the City Council when they eventually have to make similar decisions. But they won’t. The Fed bankruptcy judge will do it for them.
- livegreen: Yeah, but OUSD has to do something. There are way too many schools for the school population. There’s simply no choice. At least they’re willing to make the tough decisions. Unlike the City of...
- len raphael: Are those school board recalls entirely over the school closing decisions? Different groups or one umbrella?
- Ravi: Two recall petitions for Quan; five recall petitions for five school board members.
- len raphael: City says there are now 7 concurrent recall petitions. Not clear how many are for Quan and how many for Council Members. Direct democracy at work.
- Ravi: Can the Oakland City Council lead? Nope, nor can the Mayor. It’s up to the citizens, who are deeply divided and have been for a very long time.
- len raphael: Oakland Local is the only on or offline general circulation media that shows understanding of the depths of our fiscal situation and understands that it’s causes precede the real estate crash. One of these...
- Mkilian: Related to the Cal Supremes haircut to Oakland with respect to RDA and the immediate need for a “fiscal operations plan” is another issue put forth in Oakland’s internet newspaper, Oakland Local, is...
13 Responses to “Can somebody explain this to me?”
December 6th, 2007 at 6:12 pm
Well, I know plenty of people who hate with a passion the flashing video billboard that’s there now. If this one is another of those, expect plenty of complaints.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:17 pm
But…why? What’s wrong with it? How does it hurt anybody? And what does it have to do with the parks? What is this “moral obligation” John Sutter is referring to in the linked article?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:09 pm
i don’t know about this billboard in particular, but i wonder about billboards in general. seems a dangerous thing to divert ones eyes from the freeway, unless you’re in bumper to bumper traffic. maybe the billboard catching someone’s attention, which is it’s job and it’s just following orders, ends up causing the accident that causes that traffic. and car accidents, like billboards, make some people (like me) good money. so, maybe billboards really help everyone.
one of the strangest things i found about cuba is the complete lack of billboards. i found it quite refreshing, not being sold anything as i was strolling down block after block after block of revolutionary propaganda.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:19 pm
Seriously? People hate billboards because they think they cause accidents?
Really?
December 6th, 2007 at 9:16 pm
Billboards are major eyesores! Especially when they stand alone in a relatively uncluttered view (bridges and cranes are interesting parts of a cityscape; billboards are not, in my opinion). I think the EBRPD opposes the billboard because they are hoping to build another waterfront park under the bridge after the new span is completed, and they don’t want the park to be overshadowed by a big, ugly rectangle of advertising.
Of course, the EBRPD loves billboards when it comes to promoting their own offerings:
http://www.waterfrontaction.org/about/spec/billboards.htm
December 6th, 2007 at 9:20 pm
Okay. So it’s just that they’re ugly? I mean, I guess I can see that, but the way people get so upset about them…I just figured there must be something else to it I was missing.
Don’t even get me started on that damn park. How many deserted parks in the middle of nowhere do we need?
December 7th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
seriously, i hate billboards because they are designed to distract attention from driving. seriously.
i’m not and wasn’t speaking for people in general.
and i think they’re ugly, too. but, i don’t hate them for that.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:42 pm
The problem with the flashing billboard becomes obvious if you go up into the hills and look at the view. It junks up the view.
December 7th, 2007 at 10:05 pm
I hate billboards because they exist to sell me shit I don’t need, they tend to employ sexist or racist imagery to sell me shit I don’t need, they are impossible to ignore as they try to sell me shit I don’t need, and I didn’t vote to have public space occupied by gigantic ads for shit I don’t need.
Make any sense?
Having said that, cool blog you’ve got here. Oakland rules.
December 8th, 2007 at 10:00 am
Totally agree with Felix. Billboards are just another way for corporate America to invade our minds.
December 10th, 2007 at 5:12 pm
in addition to my previous comments, i’ll third what felix said. which is basically what i was saying, although i went about it somewhat obliquely.
i also agree that this is a great blog. easily my favorite in oaktown. thanks, v smoothe.
December 12th, 2007 at 10:09 pm
I’ll fourth what Felix said.
Some folks associate billboards with big tobacco and big liquor. No matter the advertisement, I believe many folks see billboards as detracting from the aesthetics of a city, often blocking more significant views of good architecture, hills, bodies of water, the sky-scape etc.
Moreover, many folks resent the encroachment of the advertising industry upon public places. Personally, I see the advertising industry in the business of making half truths out of whole lies.
That we have a Planning Commissioner here in Oakland (Michael Colbruno) who is or was a registered lobbyist for the billboard company Clear Channel Outdoor, begs questions of conflicts of interest. Though many would beg to differ with my public ethics philosophy.
December 16th, 2007 at 10:21 pm
Chris K. –
I fail to see the public ethics problem with Colbruno’s position on the Planning Commission. Could you please elaborate?