Update: Oreo, Dog Thrown Off Building, Was Euthanized
People Wait For Tomorrow's UWS Apple Store Opening
Cheap Chicken Wing Deal Ruined by Gunslinging Teens
FIT Students Busted For Drug Dealing Get Probation
Your Elevator Safety Week Guide: Dancing, "Rapping" Cat
With all the fuss about the Project Billboard advertisement that Clear Channel (apparently acting as a representative of the Marriott Marquis in Times Square - where the billboard would hang) rejected, Gothamist has been thinking about the proposed visual: The red-white-and-blue bomb. Now, we're ashamed to admit we agree with evil Clear Channel's lawyer, who said, "Those of us who have been in New York for a while understand the sensitivities that many New Yorkers have to bombs." It's true - it's sort of as if Project Billboard had an image of a commercial jetliner crashing into some buildings. The dove would have worked, but Project Billboard has taken that altnerative off the table, and we think a tank or missile would work, too, not that the Marriott would have accept either of those anyway. What do you think would work as an alternate image?
Anti-war messages are important and, frankly, Gothamist would like to see more of them. But, oddly enough, we understand a business's decision not to have a 69' by 44' political message greeting its guests. Clear Channel has offered Project Billboard a new space, but PB wants to keep the case in court. Do you think Project Billboard should accept a new placement, or keep fighting Clear Channel? And the Christina Aguliera billboard (which will be in Times Square) from non-partisan, voter-registration group Declare Yourself is pretty S&M-ish.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
The proposed BB does not have airlines crashing into buildings. It has an firecracker bomb image. We New Yorkers are too sensitive to have a childish depiction of a bomb as part of an anti-war message? When was the last time New York was bombed by something that looks like the proposed billboard's bomb? In 93 it was a truck bomb that blew up the WTC garage. Clear Channel trying to use 9-11 as a reason not to run the BB is disgusting. They should just stick to saying they don't want anything controversial up there. I don't agree with that, but at least that's more honest than the BS about poor sensitive New Yorkers.
while i understand that gothamist "understands" the rational that went into clear channel's decision, there are far more upsetting and realistic images of violence in movie billboards and I don’t see clear channel censoring them. Also, I agree with Washington above – it is a pretty simple representation – no more harmful than say, the “bomb” one sees if they use a “my yahoo” page to check the status of their yahoo in-box. Anyone think they got a letter-bomb?
But I think that the immediate visual that comes to mind when you think "bomb," be it a truck bomb or pipe bomb, is the kind of one in the proposed ad. But I admit - I'm touchier than most about that stuff. And this bomb looks like an ACME bomb that Wily E. Coyote would get, so I'm really confused about whether I think the bomb is awful or dumb.
And namedropper, I totally agree about movie advertising - or videogame advertising for that matter - being worse, but since it's theoretically devoid of a "message," it gets a bye.
How about a picture of our President looking stupid? There's one or two of those around...
"We New Yorkers are too sensitive to have a childish depiction of a bomb as part of an anti-war message?"
No, Clear Channel is too partisan. The management strongly supports the Bush administration, (remember all those Dixie Chicks record burnings they organized?).
Do they understand their market? A pro-war ad would be much more offensive to the majority of New Yorkers (New York being a heavily-Democrat town).
Jen H. - 2 things:
1 - Clear Channel did not organize any record burnings. Any stations that did that, did do on their own accord. Many Clear Channel stations continued to play Dixie Chicks songs.
2 - Clear Channel clearly understands their market. You are not their market, nor are any of the people who would see that sign. Marriott is their market and if they want to stay corporate-friendly to get more money, they will always do exactly what companies like Marriott say. They care about money, like everyone else.
I fully agree that Clear Channel's ridiculous appeal to New Yorkers' supposed sensitivity about bombs is nauseating. What a load of BS! It is simply unacceptable that such an innocuous image, frankly, is perceived as controversial. Gothamist is right in asking where any sort of anti-war message is in this town. Well, since perpetual war is a boon to several industries, many of which are either based or have offices in NYC, suggesting that war could be bad, golly gee, just ain't good for business. Disgusting.
Clear Channel's appeal to sensitivity is pretty dumb. I walk by harsher graffiti [and the megaphone dudes @ Union Sq saying Bush bombed the towers] every day.
However, in terms of messaging, the design is pathetic. I personally think a tank would probably communicate "democracy by force" more clearly and unambiguously. A spy-vs-spy bomb graphic is, in contrast, a pretty lame evocation of the military actions in iraq/afghanistan.
This post reminded me of this.
Seems pretty hypocritical considering FOX Sports uses images of fighter jets taking off from aircraft carriers to promote their sports shows. YAY, WAR!!! USA! USA! KILL THEM MUSLIMS, AND GOOOOOO GIANTS!!!!! Typical right wing hypocrisy.
I've seen real bombings up close. Images don't bother me.
Soulless corporations treating me like a child they have to protect bothers me.
while I hate Clear Channel, I can understand why they are doing this. But they need to stop beating around the bush and just say "The Marriot thinks it will offend the Republican delegates during the convention and need their business to employ more New Yorkers." Done. why all this "hippie politics is scary" nonsense?
Here's one idea -- contrast the red/white/blue with a green "night vision" visual. Not that I'm particularly in favor a) of the colors we've got (but at least France uses them better than we do) or b) of demonizing the color green, but that's a way to signify "war" of a particularly US nature, at least as it has regarded Iraq.
And hey, how come no one's talking about the use of Gotham here?
Jen rocks! This is NYC news without getting too political. Your soulless negativity irks me more than even the damn republicans do. Nasty, dull sarcasm.
Lou, you are spot on with your criticism.
Let's examine the real issue at hand. Did Project Billboard design an advertisement intended to be rejected for the benefit of PR? My guess is absolutely. The national and local publicity generated by Clear Channel's refusal to run the ad copy is immeasurable. Agree or disagree with the ad copy, it's become a hot topic. Brilliant strategy by Project Billboard.
Let's examine the real issue at hand. Did Project Billboard design an advertisement intended to be rejected for the benefit of PR? My guess is absolutely. The national and local publicity generated by Clear Channel's refusal to run the ad copy is immeasurable. Agree or disagree with the ad copy, it's become a hot topic. Brilliant strategy by Project Billboard.