art not ads

At least, that’s what this article in the newspaper Transit Toronto suggests. One interesting point made is that the revenue generated from advertising on Toronto public transport is minimal. Consequently the increase in fares, should the advertising be completely withdrawn, would be minimal too. And the public would potentially be far happier with their surroundings. In fact, it’s possible that by replacing the ads with art, the buses, trams and trains would attract more customers - off-setting the lost revenue from removing the advertising.

Thanks again, Andy!

New Scientist magazine August 2007 reports on a study from the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health indicating that children aged between 3 and 5 years preferred branded foods. Of the 63 children, 76 percent said they favoured fries presented in branded packaging, compared with 13 percent who preferred the unbranded alternative. The researchers said it was “interesting how strongly branding affects 3 to 5 year olds.” Other foodstuffs were tested; the children were twice as likely to prefer branded carrots, for example. New Scientist suggests that “clever marketing could convince youngsters to make healthier choices.”

Frankly, this seems like a losing battle, with the marketing budgets firmly stacked in favour of food producers who currently have no obligation to supply healthy food. Is there a better way..?
Update: More from mindhacks.com (thanks, Kelly!)

“One sample of the food was presented in [branded] packaging, another sample was presented in a similar plain paper bag. … Children consistently said the food from the [branded] packaging actually tasted better, regardless of whether it was actually from the company, or whether the company even had it on their menus… another significant predictor was how many televisions the family had in their home, suggesting that exposure to advertising itself might play a part.”

Mmm, gotta love that TV.