Often, what ultimately happens to a graphic or its components is completely out of a print provider’s hands. Two cases in point this month, both examples from the West Coast:
* The Los Angeles Times reports that, in mid-December of last year, city officials ordered the removal of a temporary building wrap for high-tech mobile phones, which was located in the city’s downtown area.
According to the paper, the ad violated the city’s 2003 ban on “super graphic” signage, which had been established to stop the proliferation of billboards. New York advertising company Inwindow Outdoor indicated to the Times that the removal cost the company more than $20,000 in lost materials and labor, plus income from the advertiser.
* Meanwhile, in San Francisco, cookie-scented strips used in conjunction with bus-shelter graphics have been barred. The cookie aroma was part of the “Got Milk?” bus-shelter ad campaign by the California Milk Processor Board, with ads designed by New York-based Arcade Marketing. The hope had been that the smell of chocolate-chip cookies would spark cravings for milk, and the promotion was launched at five shelters around the city.
Some, however, complained that the aroma could trigger asthma attacks and allergic reactions in people who are scent sensitive. As a result, the city’s Municipal Transportation Agency (MTA)-which runs the city’s public transit system and has jurisdiction over the bus shelters-sent a letter to CBS Outdoor asking that the aromatic campaign be immediately discontinued. Although they were due to be installed for approximately one month, the cookie-scented strips were up for approximately one day.
The MTA is considering prohibiting all future scented advertising in city shelters.