(Just to be clear, this is sarcasm.)
If you're in a city that relies significantly on parking fees for revenue, this might help subsidize a shift away from cars...
I'll take garbage ads over dystopian "the city implores you to <some thing I probably would have done anyway if left to my own devices>" messages any day.
I really do not understand people complaining about PSAs. Like learn some emotional maturity? If you weren't going to do the thing they're asking you not to do, then the message wasn't directed at you and you can go about your day just fine.
I think it's because it alters the moral context of the act that you're going to take anyway. If I pick up a piece of litter on my own initiative, that's an act of virtue. If I pick it up after a petty authority tells me to, that's an act of subservience. People get upset at the existence of PSAs because (in this view) they rob them of the ability to act virtuously. Which is not at all a small thing!
Yes, emotional maturity can help, and it also depends on perspective (whether I identify with the author of the PSA). But when the situation gets more complex than picking up litter, I think people forget that this dynamic exists and is important.
The thing is it doesn’t get across to the bad offenders. My train has adverts imploring you to not graffiti. I bet that has swayed literally zero people to stop marking up the traincar. And yet, someone had to make the useless sign, someone had to print it, someone had to install it on all the trains, and then someone has to replace it when that sign is then defaced.
Different people have different responses to condescension, perhaps? You probably never even considered that. Consider it next time and be better. Hope that helps.
Fifty four percent of Americans read below the sixth grade level. All effective PSA's must primarily target people who don't understand the world around them, and likely never will.
It's not condescending, because it's not targeted to you.
> You are implying that people don't understand the world if their reading level is low?
I'm not implying anything. I am directly stating that people who can't read well do not, and can not, understand the modern world.
For example, how would someone that reads below the sixth grade level understand the tariff situation, Artificial Intelligence, or Cryptocurrency? Can they make good healthcare decisions, or manage a 401k properly? Can they choose an elected representative who has their best interests, and the interests of our nation in mind? I think not, and furthermore, they will spend their lives as financial prey animals to those who are more capable.
Do you seriously believe something different? Maybe I'm missing something obvious.
If your attitude towards learning is "learning why I'm right", rather than "learning what is true", then you will tend to discard information that conflicts with your preconceptions, and distort all other information into supporting them. Most people do this to some degree, but some people elevate it to an art form.
Sure, it's easy to fall into a trap where accepting new information is hard, and I think most adults are aware that as we age it's important to try and keep an open mind. However, our society currently has an even bigger problem with people who do the opposite. People were taught to "keep an open mind", but haven't been taught what a good source is.
Like everything, you have to find a balance wherein you can accept new information but are choosy about the sources of that info. Otherwise bad data and hidden agendas will have you avoiding basic healthcare because vaccines give you autistic 5g and drinking bleach to kill the imaginary parasites makes more sense than smearing a little cortisone cream on.
A great man once said: "We do our peers, countrymen, students, and children a grave disservice by admonishing them to think for themselves without also giving them the critical thinking tools to do so, for in so doing we foster a culture where "independent thought" is equated with "contrarian thought". This gives rise to an anti-intellectual, anti-science paradigm that supports an idea not because it meets a basic standard of evidence, but rather simply because it opposes established thought. This is worse than the intellectual calcification that stagnant "herd thinking" would give rise to, because it doesn't simply halt progress — it puts it in full retreat."
Some British right wing journalist/politician made a splash complaining about health and safety announcements and signs on the underground recently. I think the issue they have is that it's a tacit admission that we have a responsibility to other people, individually and collectively. And not just to those who pay us or who we can benefit from, but to humanity as a whole.
The “see it say it sorted” messages have been fodder for left wing comedians for years. Everyone hates them. Most people ignore them by donning headphones.
This is completely out of touch with my worldview. I've lived in and around London my whole life and, while "see it say it sorted" is a common joke, I've never once heard someone say they dislike them
