Hey, there! Log in / Register
Charlie to dry out, sober up
By adamg on Tue, 01/24/2012 - 8:13pm
The MBTA will ban alcohol ads in stations and on trains and buses starting July 1, the Globe reports.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
MBTA = Dry
This is genius.
Now I'll drink to keep warm while walking everywhere
due to the MBTA cutting bus routes due to budget cuts.
Well, thank god for that
When you're $400 bazillion in debt, cutting off reliable sources of cash is a fantastic decision!
The great unwashed T-riding
The great unwashed T-riding public can't be trusted to make decisions for themselves. Nanny T needs to do it for them.
Is there a right-wing MadLibs
Is there a right-wing MadLibs tablet that you just fill out for any topic?
Yes.
The _______ ________ ________
good adjective bad adjective verb "ing"
public can't be trusted to make decisions for themselves.
Nanny ___________ needs to do it for them.
Government Agency
Take a look at the T budget
Even though advertising is everywhere, it brings in a shockingly low percentage of the T's income. Like, a negligible, drop-in-the-bucket amount. The biggest benefit ads can provide is to encourage spending at local retailers, because the T is funded by a cut of the sales tax.
We collectively rejected the idea of sales tax on alcohol, though, so those types of ads don't provide that benefit. Since the actual income they bring is a small percentage of nothing, might as well to use that space for something else.
Perhaps the T will finally figure out that they should be
leasing out their ad spaces one by one instead of letting a single Scotch company plaster a station with oversized ads at a "bargain" rate.
Of course, common sense says they should have been doing this all along to maximize their revenue.
T-totaling
Not that the ads have anything to do with drunks plunging onto the tracks.
Oh, but kids might see a beer ad.
I KNOW
Those poor kids might actually see a beer ad, the same one they can see in any magazine at the checkout counter at the supermarket, or on TV or on the internet.
Gotta protect those kids ya know..
/severe sarcasm
Should we put the cigarette ads back up?
If it's just about the revenue, we could probably make some bank off of resurrecting Joe Camel.
Cigarettes are actually harmful
Alcohol isn't, unless you overuse it.
This makes perfect sense...
This makes perfect sense, those who would buy alcohol aren't using the T anyway since it closes BEFORE BARS CLOSE!!!
This will stop drinking just
This will stop drinking just like banning all those adds for pot and crack stopped drug use. Oh wait!
Stupid!
Sometimes it seems like people in these MBTA positions walk around with a sign on their backs saying "Kick me. No, just shoot me in the head." They are so hard up for cash that they are canceling all weekend service on the commuter rail while raising monthly passes by $100. Then they turn down advertising revenue that shows up on every football game in the country? How can they be so unbelievably stupid? What about the children? You think they're going to start drinking at the age of 12 because they saw an ad on a Green Line car? They're going to be a lot more deprived because they couldn't get into the city to visit the MFA or the BPL on the weekend when the T is not running any trains. Run the ads, save the T.
A quarter a kick!
Money problem solved!
And on July 1, no less
Yes, the same day that all those cuts and fare increases go into effect, they give up this revenue source. It is now clear that MBTA leadership in fact doesn't care about their passengers, but instead don't want to rock the patronage boat. Why else wouldn't they be willing to challenge the proposed legislation? Proposed legislation! Argh!
Brilliant! Let's turn away
Brilliant! Let's turn away money. Great job and even better timing, MBTA.
Good
I am glad they will stop selling alcohol advertising. The reasons are varied but boil down to the fact that alcohol for many folks (possibly more than smokers at this point) causes far more problems than its worth. Not that I would support a return to Prohibition. As several other folks have stated each individual has to make the choice of whether to pick up a drink or not (but then that argues for the legalization of heroin and crack). But public agencies do not need to be pushers for intoxicating drugs (whether alcohol or cigarettes).
The T not selling its space for alcohol sales is not a nanny-state tactic (though claiming nanny-state is a tired cliche). This is the T acknowledging that is shares responsibility for the advertising on the T (or from gigantic banners at South Station).
But for anyone who believes the T should accept advertising for alcohol I ask do you believe the T should accept advertising for cigarettes? I am sure Phillip-Morris and the folks pushing Camels would be glad to hang 50 foot banners marketing the glamor of smoking at South Station.
Will the T find enough advertising to replace the alcohol advertisements? We will see; but assuming they won't is a false assumption. There is no evidence to prove it.
It will be nice to not walk into South Station and see gigantic banners telling me my life will be so much more exciting if I pour money into a bottle of scotch.
Booze ads in the morning?
THANK YOU! I'm glad there is someone else out there who was annoyed by the ads at SS.
I'm all for Joe Camel
Growing up the powers-that-be had not managed to drive Joe Camel out of existence. And guess what? I'm not a smoker. There are booze ads everywhere, and guess what? I'm not an alcoholic. My parents made sure growing up that I was aware of the dangers and responsibilities involved in drinking alcohol. Advertisements may influence my choice in what I drink, but they do not influence my decision to drink. I suspect I am not wildly outside of the norm when it comes to the influencing powers of advertising here.
Nor do I believe for one moment that anyone will stop drinking because they no longer see advertisements on the MBTA. (Heck, I don't believe anyone would stop drinking even if ALL advertisements vanished.)
I am also aware that the presence of a paid advertisement does not equal and endorsement of the space owner of that particular item.
This is a "feel good" decision based on the demands of one small segment of the population with no evidence that it will do anything but cost the MBTA revenue it simply cannot justify giving up at this time.
evidence
Please check your facts. There is plenty of evidence that alcohol ads impact minors drinking. Start with the (former) Marin Institute. Studies don't bother measuring how people feel. They measure the correlation between alcohol ads and minors who drink alcohol.
Why do you think the makers of alcohol spend so much on ads at, for instance, college athletic events? They know that the earlier they can get young, impressionable minds to recall a particular product the more likely that (future) customer will purchase said product.
Here's a fact from the Pacific Institute for Research & Evaluation
Overall underage drinkers consumed 15.3% of all alcohol sold in Massachusetts, totaling $665 million in sales.
But any impact?
Or, worded slightly differently, the know that those kids are going to drink, and they want them to drink their product.
The elimination of a tiny fraction of the advertising that kids see is not going to prevent any of them from drinking.
If the drinking age were returned to 18 where it should be
I bet that 'underage' percentage would be way way lower.
Advertising doesn't actually influence anybody
Shhh! Don't tell the corporations!
Like O-M-G, you mean good parenting trumps Ads/TV/Peer Pressure?
As an '80s kid I thought Joe Camel was the coolest thing in the world. I thought the Virginia Slims models stretched out across MBTA buses back then were the hottest women on the planet.
I haven't smoked a single cigarette in my life. Thanks, Mom and Dad!
Yeah, we can continue to blame Billboards/TV/"smart"phones/The Internet/video games/rap music/heavy metal/the neighbor's kid, or parents can start parenting again. What a concept.
You thought Joe Camel was
You thought Joe Camel was cool? ...that's fucked up. I always thought it was dumb as rocks.
South Station has a bar
and so does North Station. Should they be removed just because some people don't understand how to use alcohol in moderation?
I don't see how giant banners for scotch are any more objectionable than giant banners for iPhones.
(btw, some NYC commuter trains even have bar cars)
Bar cars!
Bar cars would be a great idea to avoid commuter rail cuts. Rolling parties on the weekends, rake in the money!
Does this mean they're also
Does this mean they're also going to stop selling alcohol on the commuter ferries?
Some NYC commuter trains run 80+ mph on electricity too!
Sorry, couldn't resist. You know what's causing more health problems than booze--the smog at Back Bay Station!
Gonna need a wider net
I've seen someone brazenly drinking on the T 3 times. Of those, 2 of them were swigging mouthwash directly from the bottle.
What now, MBTA? Ban oral health product ads too?
Are we sure it's a money loser?
If all advertisers pay the same rate, and the T has no trouble selling all of its ad space what's the big deal? I wouldn't be surprised if some people were concerned about advertising booze to minors and made a well connected stink about it. Still, if the T can sell that same space for the same money to say Zip Car or some grad school then why not?
Yes
From the article linked in the original posting:
So they don't currently have advertisers queued up waiting to take over that space; they're going to have to go out and re-sell the space. Given the amount of stale advertizing that can be seen on the system, it is not unreasonable to expect this process to take a while. Supply-and-demand also figures into the pricing structure of the space sold; by (artifically) reducing the demand, they are also reducing what they can charge.
I wouldn't be surprised if that $1.5M figure is actually lower than the final figure of lost revenue.