I fantasize about American cities doing this. Ads don't make Times Square attractive. They make it wretched. I'd love to see the transformation like the London's pictured in the article.
> the city would not only lose revenue from absent ads
The money would have mostly come from residents, with a bunch of it going to the advertisers, who advertise to increase profits, away from the city. I would see the city gain money.
I've seen plenty of billboards for soda and junk food, rarely if ever for broccoli. I imagine the change improved people's health and local farmers' lives.
The change made our lives worse, as due to lack of proper light, several streets became too dark and violence increased. And no, nothing change about the way we eat.
Lived in SP my whole life. I completely disagree with you.
Lack of proper light is unrelated from "outdoors" banning.
The change definitely made our lives better. But not in a utopian way of course. There were problems exposing dirty, broken, ugly walls that were never taken care of. Still, I believe, a net positive.
I don't understand the lighting issue. The city should have street lights for this. You were relying on business' advertising for safe lighting? What am I missing?
> the city would not only lose revenue from absent ads
The money would have mostly come from residents, with a bunch of it going to the advertisers, who advertise to increase profits, away from the city. I would see the city gain money.
I've seen plenty of billboards for soda and junk food, rarely if ever for broccoli. I imagine the change improved people's health and local farmers' lives.