Blog
Selling the City to Advertising? Nothing Novel to See Here
Aug
Recent debates on observable advertising in Melbourne and Sydney have highlighted public concerns about the commercialisation of public space. The sense that our cities are becoming increasingly vulnerable to commercial forces is based on the assumption that advertising has no place in our cities.
However, historical images of our cities challenge this view. They reveal that advertising and commercial signage are an integral part of our urban landscapes and urban life.
Read more: Digital media is changing the way buildings look, and city policies must change with them
Melbourne’s recent controversy over a proposed billboard echoes debates from the 19th century about billboards occupying prominent city spaces. Animated images projected onto the wall of 231 Swanston Street will transform it into one of the largest advertising billboards in the city. Described as “a huge display with an area of 305 square meters”, its size is the key issue, but the controversy does not end there.
Melbourne City Council initially rejected the sign, to argue:
[…] Digital billboards displaying high-frequency advertising in public spaces are creating an unprecedented level of visual clutter that distracts from the streets of our cities.
Lumen Billboards appealed this decision to the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of Victoria. VCAT upheld the appealconsidering that the size and lighting of the sign were appropriate for the site and that it had little impact on the cultural heritage of the area.
Some see the VCAT decision as another example of public interests overriding massive business. Writing in The AgeNicola Philp attacked the perceived commercialisation of public spaces. Reader comments echoed her sentiments. One reader lamented:
Melbourne becomes an advertiser [sic] a paradise with vivid flashing signs everywhere. The beauty and elegance that Melbourne once had is slowly eroding.
Another took aim at the ad, raging:
I hate the thought of having to force more and more intrusive advertising on us.
Concerns about the commercialisation of public space were similarly raised in response to the utilize of the Sydney Opera House as a billboard promoting a horse race on Mount Everest last October, with the Opera House’s chief executive opposing the highly controversial decision by the NSW government. More than 310,000 people have signed the change.org petition against this decision.
Read more: View from the Hill: Naughty Mr. Jones
Mick Tsikas/AAP
Such figures did not deter the state government, which had several prominent figures supporting its decision. Among them was Prime Minister Scott Morrison, who described the iconic building as “the largest billboard in Sydney”.
The prime minister’s crude description is, strictly speaking, true. Despite a policy banning “logos, corporate identity or colours”, the Opera House’s sails were regularly used for promotional purposes. Unofficially, they also served as a canvas for various protest slogans. But the fuss over Everest was as much about commercial promotion as it was about the power of the city’s political elite.
Concerns about commercialization are aged
Concerns about the commercialization of the city’s streets and landmarks are nothing fresh. In 1880, Brisbane’s Telegraph newspaper criticized the billboards “occupying two of the most conspicuous spots in the city,” calling them “gross eyesores.” The Lord Mayor of Sydney expressed similar sentiments in 1907, when he was he was reported to have said:
It was a scandal in a civilized community that every square inch of land bordering on a public street was made disgusting by posters.
Significantly, one of the first documents printed in Australia was a 1796 program promoting a theatrical performance. Like government orders, the program and other commercial notices were prominently displayed on city streets. Retailers added their mark to the streets by hiring sign makers to decorate their premises and promote their goods.
The importance and influence of this type of commercial sign was formally recognised in 1830 when the Governor of Novel South Wales it was decided that it is illegal to “maintain any sign, inscription, painting or other marking on or about his home or property” that would falsely suggest that the home is licensed.
As commerce expanded, so did the amount of advertising on city streets. By the early 20th century, commercial signs and advertisements were an ingrained and inescapable aspect of city life. They permeated walls, fences, and all parts of public transportation systems. Electricity and neon lighting extended the reach of outdoor advertising into the night hours.
In recent times, sports facilities have gained another commercial layer by selling naming rights. Marvel Stadium was previously known as Colonial Stadium, Telstra Dome and Etihad Stadium. What’s more confusing, Brisbane AND Sydney Both stadiums were home to ANZ Stadium (formerly known as QE II and Stadium Australia/Telstra Stadium respectively).
And then there are the signs we love
Joe Castro/AAP
Our relationship with commercial signs is not stationary. Some signs have taken on a life of their own. Coca-Cola sign at King’s Cross, Sydney and Girl jumping around Abbottsford in Melbourne have become part of the cultural heritage of individual cities.
The interest generated by the discovery of a long-hidden “ghost mark” for Peapes menswear near Sydney’s Wynyard Station similarly reveals that retail signs and advertising are less practical than critics suggest.
Commercial advertising is part of the fabric and heritage of our city. While the VCAT decision certainly raises legitimate concerns about the processes and values we apply to public spaces, approving a giant billboard is entirely consistent with our past.
Whether we like it or not is, of course, another matter.
