Here’s an interesting poster seen on Easter Road.
As the Council’s poster says, “appearance matters.” As anyone who has even partially signed up to the “broken windows theory” of neighbourhood management will tell you, fly posting is said to increase people’s fear of crime.
Question is, does a tatty flyposter from the council on an abandoned shop, not somewhat undermine the message? Is it not a branding fail? Is it really best practice to be funding flyposting firms?
Once upon a time, local authorities were hell bent in putting flyposting firms and the businesses who funded them out of business. In Camden they even took out an ASBO against a flyposting company boss. But legally, it proved too tricky.
So, eventually, local authorities adopted a different tack and did deals with the same firms. The deal works just like the one you see in this photo.
The council ‘authorises sites’ and the company that manages the ‘authorised’ sites gets to put up their adverts in return for ‘managing’ the site. This therefore reduces the cost to the council of removing the flyposters when they get ugly. In theory.
Of course, this still means that people who live near the ‘authorised’ sites have to live with the posters whether they want them or not.
And in a latest twist, it seems the council and the Scottish Government has now gone from trying to legislate against flyposting companies, through tolerating them on the basis that it cuts the costs of managing them, to paying them for their cheap ‘advertising’ services.
See also the No Knives Better Lives fail on Great Junction Street.
Anyway, if you think this poster looks rubbish, “why don’t you report it?”
The phone numbers are on the poster.