Screwing the Commons and All Things Civic

[peristaltor]

Just caught a piece of rage-inducing news: a Washington State House bill proposing selling naming rights to elements of public transportation to raise money. As he almost always does, I think Goldy says it best:

Personally, I'm opposed to selling the naming rights on state bridges and highways because I think it cheapens the commons and

Comments

[notmrgarrison]

The downside is the cheapness. Every time someone says the name, they are in effect advertising the company.

[notmrgarrison]

I guess you're not seeing the cheapness, but why should people be forced to be unpaid advertisers?

[notmrgarrison]

Saying "The Golden Gate Bridge" isn't advertising a product the way "Fed Ex Bridge" does.

I don't see where the force is in this case

The "force" in this case would be having to say the corporations name in order to identify the object without being cumbersome.

And they're not unpaid advertisers anyway - they're exchanging that advertisement for lower rates

Something tells me they didn't all agree to that exchange. And I'm not convinced their taxes are going to go down because of the advertising. And in the case of privately owned stadiums, I'm not at all convinced their ticket prices are going down either.

[peristaltor]

Something tells me they didn't all agree to that exchange.

Exactly.

When the first baseball stadium was built, there was buzz about town on what the name should be. All of the sudden, even before it was finished, it was pronounced that it shall be the name of a local insurance agency. The outrage was palpable. One city councilman dismissed the outrage as "populist crap." "Populist Crapper" tee-shirts became instantly popular. (I'm not sure what happened to mine.)

[peristaltor]

Conversely, why be unpaid advertisers for the government, using that concept?

Could you name one example?

[peristaltor]

Your example's point remains obscure.

[peristaltor]

No, such a user suffers the advertisement.

I'm still not sure where you're going with this.

[peristaltor]

I don't see where the force is in this case.

Think ball game. The commentators covering the game are forced to un-snarkily and without condescension name the stadium. No matter what they might think of the named company, anyone listening to/watching the broadcast is forced to endure it.

[peristaltor]

No one's forcing them to broadcast, etc.

And without broadcasting, the stadium would be funded how? Long gone are the days when the local ticket sales paid for both the structure and the teams.