Privatization of Public Space

Privatization and Advertising in Public Space The fight to add oer the introduction has begun. This fight is surrounded by big corporate companies and their lead to take over the most general quadrangle and plaster it with their advertisements or just simply control it. In this paper I every last(predicate)ow for examine a variety of opinions on how they have invaded public lieu and if this invasion is benefiting the public or not. In roughly cases when big companies muster take over in a public location it sack up be positive.Shea Stadium, although it was not exactly public, was greatly improved when Citi root word bought it and rebuilt the park. It improved the masking experience at the Mets games and Citigroup soak ups publi city beca phthisis people associate the park with them. more people say that this sort of privatization by a big connection can have numerous positive effects for people who single-valued function the position. capital of Massachusettss su lfur Station has overly been privatized in fresh years. The MBTA entered into a ground lease with Beacon South Station Associates, a wholly owned entity of Beacon Properties Corporation, on January 28, 1988.The MBTA still uses the station for the trains and buses simply the conjunction that leases it can set its own rules for within the space and has the proper(a) to dole out advertisement space within the station. Although commuters can still use the space for travel purposes the space is no longer public. During Occupy capital of Massachusetts the protesters peacefully assembled in South Station when the weather became colder but were asked to set off by police because on that point were not allowed to congregate there per rules of the company leasing the space.According so Una Spencer, an activist and protester during the occupy movement, everywhere we ar encountering public spaces which we are told are under control of private companies. She also mentions thats our ta xes are being utilise to police these areas that are owned by private companies. Spenser is seeing is a chipping away of our civil rights from many directions and our tax dollars are pay the police who keep us from practicing these rights.David Morris, co-founder and delinquency president of Institute for topical anaesthetic Self-Reliance, brings forwarfared the idea that companies should compete on an equal footing, and where those with the most money do not necessarily give tongue to in the loudest voice. Sometimes companies with the most money are able to get their name out more that a smaller company by means of advert. By having ads plastered around a city, a consumer is more seeming to choose that companys product than a smaller company. He believes that by seeing ads for specific companies stifles our ability to choose freely between different things.Morris believes in having public spaces where people within a community of interests can congregate that is free of co mmercialism where people can package ideas. In Sao Paulo, Brazil people are in agreement with ideas equal to Morriss and laws are being put into rate to remove advertising. Larry Rohter, American journalist, covered the decision in Sao Paulo, Brazil to remove all advertising from the city. Sao Paulo is South Americas largest and most prosperous city and there has been much controversy over the law.Rohter quotes Brazilian columnist Roberto Pompeu de Toledo saying the law is a rare victory of the public interest over private, of tramp over disorder, aesthetics over ugliness, of cleanliness over trash. One controversy over this law is that people who work for companies creating advertising may lose jobs. orotund companies whos advertisements depart be taken down are claiming consumers go forth be less informed in their purchasing decisions and even that streets will be less safe at night with the loss of scintillation from signs. Not only would the law put away billboards, b ut it would also ban ads on buses, blimps, and plains, and restrict the size of signs that stores would be allowed to have. Rohter reported one women in Sao Paulo saying the truth is that there are so many banners, billboards, placards, signs, and posters all over the place that theyve lost their impact. The mayor or Sao Paulo talks most bringing advertising back in the future, but with many restrictions and limitations. The city will become an outdoor metropolis with no outdoor advertising. The net is an opposite place that has become a common ground for advertising. Facebook used to be a free online community created by a group of college kids. Initially Facebook was supposed to be free of advertisements and that set it apart from other social networking sites. Now, not only does Facebook have advertisements, the advertisements are tailor make to each user based on that persons likes and activities stick on on their profile. On my Facebook is see ads for snowboard websites bec ause I have the posted as one of my activities.Facebook says it needs to have ads because it keeps Facebook free for users. They say its also beneficial for advertisers because the right group of people will see their ads. The net profit is just another place where companies are fighting to broadcast to more customers. Along with the Internet, companies also have influence in eating houses, a place where we may not have even suspected it. Have you ever been to a restaurant and when you ordered a coke and the waitress asks, is Pepsi ok? This is because restaurants have deals with soda companies and they receive additional benefits when they decide to be exclusive. By having restaurants that are exclusive the soda company theoretically has won that restaurant over and all the customers in that restaurant. Its like a war to see which soda companies can have the most restaurants exclusively sell their soda. After careful consideration of all these opinions I cannot say I have come to a final conclusion on advertising in public space. I can see how in some cases advertising and privatization have gone overboard.Losing our ability to congregate in South Station seems a little absurd to me because our tax dollars are paying to enforce laws that are keeping us out of a at once public space. However, what would a place like conviction Square in New York City be without its huge glowing billboards and signs? And in Sao Paulo they are outlawing blimps as a part of the anti-billboard law, and I moot of Bostons Hood blimp that I can see on the apparent horizon from my dorm room window. Is it really such an obstruction to public space? I dont think so. And it also doesnt motivate what milk I choose to drink because I still am not a big fan of hood milk.In my opinion the vanquish solution would be to haves stricter laws about advertising and privatization. I think Time Square would lose all its magic if the ads were to be taken off the buildings but in places like sc hools advertising should really be obsolete. As for privatization, I think if a public space is going to be privatized then public dollars should not be used in that space in any way. In South Station the Transit practice of law should not be enforcing rules put in place by a private organization when it is tax dollars paying the transit police, not the company.I think its a pretty fine line and it is the responsibility of brass officials to get the balance between public space, advertising, and privatization right. Bibliography Advertising on Facebook. Facebook. 2 Oct 2012. https//www. facebook. com/about/ads/ Morris, David. Curbing the Commercialization of Public Space. Institute for Local Self-Reliance. 15 Jan 2009. 2 Oct 2012. http//www. ilsr. org/curbing-commercialization-public-space/ Rohter, Larry. Streets are Paved with Neons Glare, and City Calls a Halt. New York Times. 2 Dec 2006. 2 Oct 2012. //www. nytimes. com/2006/12/12/world/Americas/12paulo. html? pagewanted=prin t&_r=0 Spenser, Una. Occupy Boston the Privatizing of Public Spaces. periodic Kos. 30 Oct 2011. 2 Oct 2012. http//www. dailykos. com/story/2011/10/30/1031512/-Occupy-Boston-the-privatizing-of-public-spaces Why Arent Coke and Pepsi Sold Together at Restaurants? Xatal. 12 Mar 2009. 2 Oct 2012. http//xatal. com/miscellaneous/why-arent-coke-and-pepsi-sold-together-at-restaurants/ 1 .Una Spenser. Occupy Boston the Privatizing of Public Spaces. Daily Kos. 30 Oct 2011. 2 Oct 2012. http//www. dailykos. com/story/2011/10/30/1031512/-Occupy-Boston-the-privatizing-of-public-spaces 2 . Una Spenser. Occupy Boston the Privatizing of Public Spaces. Daily Kos. 30 Oct 2011. 2 Oct 2012. http//www. dailykos. com/story/2011/10/30/1031512/-Occupy-Boston-the-privatizing-of-public-spaces 3 . Ibid 4 . David Morris. Curbing the Commercialization of Public Space. Institute for Local Self-Reliance. 15 Jan 2009. 2 Oct 2012.