May 1, 2007
Madness: ONESTOP Beyond
A source at City Hall recently warned that the ONESTOP Media Group, which operates the advertising screens on TTC station platforms, will soon make another play to put video ads inside subway cars (the Toronto Public Space Committee successfully warded off their last attempt). The new cars the TTC has ordered will have video displays, anyway (see after the jump), but as of yet there are no plans for them to be used for advertising.
So it's not too surprising that ONESTOP is attempting to buy some credibility for itself and legitimate its ad screens by hooking up with the CONTACT Toronto Photography Festival (which begins today): "Transit Stories gathers short photo-narratives by TTC riders, showcasing them on the ONESTOP Toronto network for the month of May."
While we of course do not begrudge the CONTACT festival for partnering with ONESTOP, we are dismayed that a company that once packed a TPSC meeting with its own staffers and their family members (in an attempt to vote the TPSC's campaign against the video screens out of existence), would keep trying to pass itself off as attuned to the needs and desires of the people of this city. A company that makes the only really important information (the time) impossible to see in order to make room for prominent advertising and to draw people close enough to the screens in order to clearly see that advertising. A company that now has exclusive rights to install clocks on platforms but refuses to do so in stations at which there wouldn't be enough eyeballs for their ads (think Rosedale). A company that hired Mike Harris, the man who crippled the TTC, as the Chair of their advertising firm.
And now they want to be our latex salesman a friend of the photoblogging community.
At TransitCamp in February, ONESTOP CEO Michael Girgis told the TPSC that when designing the layout of the screens, they surveyed riders as to what they most wanted to see. The public said that what was most important was the time; after that, weather, then service updates, and then finally "advertising and content."
"So why," the TPSC asked him, "are the sizes of those things on the screen inversely proportional to the demand for them?"
He said that there are different ways to measure size and that that wasn't necessarily true.
"No, no," the TPSC said. "We're talking about the actual area of each. We could take a tape measure to the screen."
They talked/discussed/argued for half an hour, and he gave the TPSC his email address if they had any more questions. About a month later, they did have more questions, and so they sent him an email. And then another one.
In one of those emails, the TPSC asked Girgis to clarify what was meant by "motion detection" capability in the context of the "information pillars" in CBS's "street furniture" proposal; the video programming for which would have been provided by ONESTOP. That is, their proposal included a plan to put at least one hundred and twenty illuminated video ad kiosks on Toronto's sidewalks, which would have apparently activated when people walked within a certain distance of them; ONESTOP is quite upfront about their goal to make sure that there isn't a single moment in a day when you are not confronted with a video ad.
So is this really a company to which you want to grant "the right to print, publish, broadcast, and use [your photos] in any manner [they] deem appropriate worldwide, in any media now known or hereafter developed, including, without limitation, the World Wide Web, at any time or times in relation to the Contact project"?
Jonathan Goldsbie is a campaigner with the Toronto Public Space Committee. Photo by Torontoist's Marc Lostracco. Rendering of "Safety Information Monitor" in new trains from the TTC website.
|
Since when does the Torontoist refer to Adam Giambrone as a source from City Hall?
"While we of course do not begrudge the CONTACT festival for partnering with ONESTOP.."
that sounds a lot to me like the girlfriend who's been cheated on, but cos she's SOOO in love with her boyfriend she looks the other way and puts all blame on the other woman.
Torontoist needs to become less of the TPSC's mouthpiece, in my opinion.
Who cares about the clock? Wanna know what time it is? It's time for you to buy a watch.
What we really need on those screens is detailed info on current TTC service conditions.
Re: Clock Size/Overall Layout of the Screens
Speaking as a graphic designer, the hierarchy of information on the screen layout works quite well. I've never once had any problem finding anything (especially the time). Your reference to "taking a tape measure to the TTC screen" is completely idiotic. You remind me of a client who keeps asking to "make his logo bigger" yet does not understand a single thing about design. Setting the type size in 200 pt is irrelevant because good design is achieved through more effective measures. Michael Girgis was in fact correct when he said that there are different ways of measuring size.
For example, the time is situated in the top left corner on a red background creating one of the most visually dominant elements within the hierarchy of the composition. The top corner is one of the first places the eye is drawn to and red is one of if not the most dominant colours as it advances or appears to be more active within a layout as compared to neutral or cool colours (which make up the majority of the advertisements).
Furthermore, in the source which you referenced about the time size being too small (conveniently enough, you self-referenced a website of which you are "campaign co-ordinator") you wrote:
"Today, as more and more people depend on cell phone clocks instead of watches, the Metron clocks have become invaluable since many cellphone clocks don't work underground!"
i don't know when your last cell phone was (maybe your still using one from 1983), but since when do cell phone clocks not work underground? Anyone?
---------
Re: Joe Clark citation, Costing $56k
What Joe Clark's blog failed to mention is where the funding is coming from to offset the cost of the $56k labour. Firstly, he does not mention what percentage of the TTC's maintenance budget this constitutes, or whether other forms of advertising cost less in maintenance (changing posters, etc.). Secondly, according to the deal the TTC signed with Onestop, Onestop is obliged to give the TTC 10 per cent of its sales, guaranteeing a minimum of $750,000 over seven years. So unless the installation of the screens are costing over $100,000 annually in labour, plus whatever the TTC's relevant operational budget is for that labour, then the screens aren't really the costly drain that you imply.
Don't get me wrong, 10% of a projected 40 million isn't alot of money, but considering this is a start-up venture with plenty of opportunity to grow this could become very financially rewarding for the TTC in years to come.
Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of an "ad-free" ttc as well, but reality is that it will never happen.
"Since when does the Torontoist refer to Adam Giambrone as a source from City Hall?"
It wasn't Giambrone. And since when are we the Torontoist?
"Torontoist needs to become less of the TPSC's mouthpiece, in my opinion."
Does anyone ever complain about Kevin writing up Newmindspace stuff?
"Who cares about the clock? Wanna know what time it is? It's time for you to buy a watch."
I don't like watches, and I don't own a cell phone.
"I've never once had any problem finding anything (especially the time)."
Finding the time is not at all hard. Seeing it if you're more than a few metres away is.
"Your reference to 'taking a tape measure to the TTC screen' is completely idiotic."
The larger things are, the easier it is to view them clearly from a distance.
"conveniently enough, you self-referenced a website of which you are 'campaign co-ordinator'"
I actually wasn't with the TPSC during the original ONESTOP fight. I joined a few months later, in June 2005. All of the ONESTOP stuff on the TPSC site was written by Mez.
"'...many cellphone clocks don't work underground!'"
Yeah, that didn't seem right to me. I'll try to remember to ask Mez the next time I talk to him... his phone is reasonably recent.
"What Joe Clark's blog failed to mention is where the funding is coming from to offset the cost of the $56k labour."
The fact is that the TTC shouldn't have to pay it at all. It's standard in similar ad-funded privatization contracts (such as with Toronto's current and upcoming "street furniture") for the company that's responsible for producing the items (and selling ads on them) to also cover the costs of installation and maintenance.
> but since when do cell phone clocks not work underground
Actually, there are phones whose clocks don't work underground. Really.
But the point is this: the ONESTOP screens are not useful at all, unless you like recycled scrolling headlines and really, really can't bear four minutes without pre-recorded visual stimulation. They were installed against public opposition as video ads poorly disguised as a useful service that don't even do the things they were supposed to in the first place.
Do you remember the Lower Bay diversion? That would have been a great time to use the boards' magical announcement powers to explain in detail what was going on, when instead it said "The TTC is doing some stuff, watch out for the makeshift signs!"
Finally, thank the gods this is a blog and not a newspaper. The city's dead trees don't give nearly enough time to public space news as it deserves, and as a blog, "the" Torontoist has the editorial freedom to discuss the quality of public life in the city we live in, which is inextricably tied to the many campaigns of the TPSC.
Both Bracken's relationship with Newmindspace and Goldsbie's with TPSC are disclosed in their staff profiles. So there is no ethical dilemma with this.
Topping's NOW internship is another matter....
IMO, having Torontoist poster discusses causes/organizations with which they are involved can only enhance the quality of information received. As Kevin says, there is already minimal public space news discussed in the Toronto media and torontoist fills a gap.
It is up to the viewer to determine the bias.
Good post.
A lot of the Torontoist staff—who certainly aren't in it for the money—were brought on board specifically because of their expertise or opinions in a certain area, just as all the other media outlets employ architecture critics, movie critics, City Hall critics, music critics, sex columnists and the ubiquitous op-ed articles.
For our more polarizing writers, the bias is pretty much crystal clear, but that doesn't discount the points being made, and actually allows a voice for alternative or more extreme viewpoints. We encourage discussion under each article we publish, and that dialogue often gives our readers the proper tools to make decisions for themselves. If they may not agree (and many won't), there are other things on Torontoist that would be more in line with their interests, and everyone is free to constructively provide feedback to all our articles, both privately and publicly.
The alternative is to be boring, talking about someone's party we went to and posting pictures of what we ate for dinner the night before, and that's no fun for anyone. We try, at the very least, to give people something to talk about, even if they vehemently disagree with something one of our writers says. Torontonians are a lot more passionate about their city than they get credit for, and the more discourse the better, IMHO. Toronto's much-ballyhooed claim of "diversity" also means that of opinion, and that's a fantastic thing.
I am not a NOW intern. I have never been one, I have never applied to be one. I pinky-swear.
I assume that that comes out of some confusion over one of the comments on my "119,873 > 355,000?" article. I tried to be pretty clear at the time that I wasn't a NOW intern. Seriously. The last time I was in the NOW building was to pick up tickets to Marie Antoinette that I won in a contest, like, six months ago.
I was, of course, kidding.
My last cell phone would display an annoying OMG DER'S NO SERVICE HERE LEMME LOOK NOPE LOOKING AGAIN NOPE STILL LOOKING message instead of anything useful, like say the time, or the menu system, when on the TTC.
Expect ads on the car screens, that's how the TTC works. (Wow, $750,000 over how many years? Who negotiated that stinker on the TTC's behalf -- Mike Harris?)
I think its worth noting "from a reliable source within the TTC" that the $56,000 Joe Clark references is paid by Onestop to the TTC... its a direct bill back for the work the TTC does for Onestop.
Opinions are great... facts are even better.
But the point is this: the ONESTOP screens are not useful at all, unless you like recycled scrolling headlines and really, really can't bear four minutes without pre-recorded visual stimulation. They were installed against public opposition as video ads poorly disguised as a useful service that don't even do the things they were supposed to in the first place.
- Really? I think Crimestoppers and the City of Toronto would disagree with you on that one. Perhaps you should say things with substance rather than with a 'sub-stance'
Onestop’s TTC Network Finds Missing Teen
Do you remember the Lower Bay diversion? That would have been a great time to use the boards' magical announcement powers to explain in detail what was going on, when instead it said "The TTC is doing some stuff, watch out for the makeshift signs!"
That's a TTC decision it has nothing to do with Onestop, perhaps you should write them a letter explaining how you would like more details when they run into problems or make a change.
Finding the time is not at all hard. Seeing it if you're more than a few metres away is.
as opposed to all the LED signs that never worked or weren't maintained by the TTC?
I don't like watches, and I don't own a cell phone.
So why are you so concerned with what time it is when you're on a TTC platform if you refuse to buy a watch, it's now suddenly the TTC or Onestop's responsibility to keep you informed of the time?
I also find it rather amusing that a site that has 2 advertising spots on it's homepage (one more than the Onestop screens) is complaining about advertising any where else. So I guess what's good for the goose isn't so good for the gander huh?
The contact photography festival is now the LARGEST in the world with Onestop's contribution of their screens as 'gallery space', this is a moment of pride, but typically the TPSC is finding something to whine about, in amidst no one at city hall listening to them about the street furniture bid (a bit of projection going on?).
I think it's great that Onestop is DONATING this space (meaning they are losing ad revenue to accomodate the festival) to ensure our City is on the map for many things, which now include a photography festival!
Big-ups to onestop for making Contact the LARGEST photography festival IN THE WORLD!
Give me great pride in being a Torontonian!
:)
TPSC and the other groups who "have been invited to post here" do so because they know Torontoist can provide eyeballs for their content.
So when it comes down to it, we're all not that different from advertising companies.
Torontoist has had many open calls for writers, which draw a lot of people who have points to make or expertise in a certain area, and they're selected based on their ability to put a sentence together coupled with having something interesting to write about. That's it.
Comparing Torontoist to an advertising company because one writer is an anti-ad activist is a straw man argument.
As for Keven's points above, I don't necessarily have the same negative reaction to ONESTOP, but you insinuate that ONESTOP is singlehandedly responsible for Contact's success. The only thing I'd say about that is that ONESTOP is mandated to provide a certain percentage of "free" space (just as TV and radio stations are) and the money they pay to the TTC for the privilege of being in every single subway station is an absolutely miniscule amount in the context of the TTC's annual budget. It's fantastic that they're accomodating Contact, but the good PR that they get for Contact is worth every penny of any alleged lost revenue.
As for ads on Torontoist, we very intentionally keep them at a minimum as not to annoy our readers. Trust me: we could be raking it in if we accepted adult advertising or the flashing/jiggling banners, and we don't click-whore by breaking up the article with only one paragraph or so left so we can claim higher pageviews to advertisers or "wallpaper" a company logo in the background. We try and get ads that are relevant and useful to our readers, like Cinematheque, Zipcar, and the "Line Painter" novel by Toronto author Claire Cameron.
Infrastucture like server space costs money, and virtually every cent of income goes to our writers (I haven't been paid one penny since I stepped up as Co-Editor in January), who certainly aren't writing for the money but rather because they are passionate and they believe in Toronto.
Again, we truly, truly appreciate our readership and we love that the discourse in the comments is always so well thought-out and informed. Having 150,000 readers and a stable of diverse writers means that we won't always agree with each other, but at least we'll have something interesting to talk about.
One of the problems with the Lower Bay diversion was that by then Museum hadn't been converted to OneStop TVs so even if it had the facility to display next train the equipment wasn't there.
It will be interesting to see how GO Transit integrates transit info when its CanWest-con TVs go live on their trains.
Personally, I'd be just fine with those stupid screens -- ads, small clock, and all -- if only:
Huge bonus points if they dedicated part of the screen to showing how long until the next train arrives.
but you insinuate that ONESTOP is singlehandedly responsible for Contact's success
I'm not insinuating anything, Onestop IS the reason why Contact is the BIGGEST festival in the WORLD this year. There is no refuting that, regardless of the reasons. It wasn't the biggest last year and it wasn't this year, only until onestop contributed their screens.
Also, You can't fault advertising companies for complying with CRTC bylaws.
If ad companies DON'T comply groups like TPSC complain, if ad companies DO comply these same groups (as well as yourself) also complain or say things like "ONESTOP is mandated to provide a certain percentage of "free" space"
damned if they do, damned if they don't
The fact is that companies can still 'choose' who they give 'free' space to. The fact that companies like onestop provide free space to LOCAL toronto groups like Contact or whoever else, seems that they are already on the right track and not giving it up for the highest bidder.
I say people just stop complaining about petty things and realize that together both public and private individuals/companies are what drives our city and makes it the awesome diverse, well known city that we are.
As to your argument for why there is advertising on this site. Well the same argument can be made for companies like onestop. I mean it's not like their employees work for free (who contribute to our city's economy). The infrastructure (do you realize how much it costs to 'host' a network such as onestop?) costs money and must be paid for somehow.
via advertising, the same way 'you guys' pay for your hosting to get 'your screen on the web' the same way onestop gets their 'screens on the ttc'.
P.S. I've mentioned nothing about 'success'. I merely pointed out how grand scale it (contact) has become. Contact has been a great thing every year and it's continuing success will be because of media partnerships in the future such as this one, IMHO a big step in the right direction. Perhaps on day contact won't need media partnerships b/c of all the legwork that went on in previous years ;)
Cheers
ONESTOP is absolutely not the reason why CONTACT is so successful. If attributed to any sponsor, that would likely be Hewlett-Packard and Scotiabank, as well as the 200+ venues that the photos are running in, of which the subway system is one. The CONTACT material on the subway screens only appears six times every hour anyway.
Look, I don't personally have a problem with CONTACT being on ONESTOP (what's with the caps, company people?) or even in the subway system itself, and I actually create advertising for a living! Still, don't give ad procurement agencies too much credit to do something that makes zero difference to their bottom line, but gets them lots of great PR lauding the goodness of their hearts.
ONESTOP and TV stations are forced to provide airtime for non-profit and NGO PSA-type material (at least one full hour every day, spread over twenty hours), and that's free airtime—they can't look for the "highest bidder" anyway. The amount of time proportionally donated to CONTACT over a month period has virtually no effect on their existing ad buys. CONTACT is a nice thing for them to "sponsor," but it's no skin off their backs.
Here's how the system breaks down by the hour:
• 45 minutes of commercial advertising
• 7 minutes of TTC advertising
• 3 minutes of non-profit advertising
• 3 minutes of other video content (CONTACT, Transit Trivia, You’re Watching the OneStop Network...)
• 2 minutes of time checks
The TTC is only guaranteed slightly more than $100,000 annually from ONESTOP to add to its $700 million annual budget. Is that worth it? I dunno. Either way, ONESTOP wins. And maybe that's OK.
As for the comparison between Torontoist's ads and ONESTOP's, we are not a site that exists for the purpose of creating advertising, whereas ONESTOP is an ad procurement company. Big difference.
ONESTOP is absolutely not the reason why CONTACT is so successful
Why do you keep saying 'the reason for success' when all I've said is 'the reason for being the biggest in the world'?
You are obviously seeing what you want to see.
You are also wrong about onestop exists for the purpose of creating advertising, that's a grave assumption, you should learn some facts first.
But hey, what do I know? You seem to have a good handle on your own 'opinion'.
p.s. the ad comparison was to illustrate a point
things costs money, whether you are an indiviual or a company you do things to offset those costs. In today's day and age, it usually comes down to advertising.
stop being so semantical and argumentative and realize what the point is that is being drawn in front of you.
Keven: Feel free to cite sources to back up your statement, 'cause I haven't seen any.
No, CONTACT isn't the "biggest in the world" because of ONESTOP. Not by a long shot.
If ONESTOP screens don't exist on the TTC for the purpose of advertising, then what are they doing? Curing cancer and giving away free kittens? They are an ad procurement agency, and there's nothing wrong with that.
The author may be against subway advertising, but I'm not. What I don't like are huge deals with agencies like ONESTOP or Astral that give them disproportional power to advertise to a somewhat captive audience with virtually unavoidable content, yet add only a pittance of income to the City or the TTC. ONESTOP keeps 90% of their profit made from the TTC's ridership and contributes almost nothing to the TTC's bottom line.
ONESTOP and TV stations are forced to provide airtime for non-profit and NGO PSA-type material, and that's free airtime—they can't look for the "highest bidder" anyway.
They can still look for the 'highest bidder'...
A great example of this is Global and their refusal to support good canadian content, so they give what THEY want, which are crappy canadian tv shows that are all too often directed or produced by 'friends of global'
but again, what do I know?
The amount of time proportionally donated to CONTACT over a month period has virtually no effect on their existing ad buys. CONTACT is a nice thing for them to "sponsor," but it's no skin off their backs.
I'm assuming you are a creative, so perhaps you should chew the numbers first and look at this from a business perspective.
Now these numbers are obviously not real, but they are here to produce a point. If 2 spots cost say 20,000 which are replaced with contact content that's approximitely 100,000 dollars a day in lost revenue - a bit more than the 'skin off your back' or mine for that matter.
as you've pointed out, onestop is a startup venture, not exactly a 'mature company' like say Y&R that can throw tonnes of money at things and not worry about the results.
I think Keven is simply saying that once ONESTOP was added to CONTACT, that its addition made the festival the largest in the world. I've also read that elsewhere. It could've been some other addition that made it the largest, but this just so happened to be it.
Anyway, people need to sometimes stop bitching about "evil corporations" and realize that this is doing a lot of good for artists around the city, regardless of whether or not their photos will be seen for only a few seconds each hour. It only takes one important person to see an artist's photo and be impacted enough to seek them out and offer a job/purchase a print, etc., which could be the exposure needed to change the artist's career.
Also, to say that ONESTOP wants to be the photoblogging community's "latex salesman" is just plain insulting.
Keven, the CONTACT content is not replacing advertising spots. It's happening within the 15-minutes of non-advertising time every hour that ONESTOP is forced to comply with under its contract with the TTC.
By your arbitrary number, which is irrelevant and inaccurate anyway, they could lose $100,000 per day over the month when the CONTACT pieces appear five times hourly. Yet, ONESTOP only guarantees the TTC slightly more than $100,000 annually. Cry me a river.
No, CONTACT isn't the "biggest in the world" because of ONESTOP. Not by a long shot.
http://blogto.com/contact_2007/2007/04/transit_stories/
http://www.canada.com/cityguides/toronto/story.html?id=7ad0cfcc-291b-40ce-b84d-e1dcae8a1b6f
Perhaps you should re-think the rest of your points as well. Maybe do a google search or something before you create the illusion that your opinions are factual
Apparently only one of us knows what were talking about here and I refuse to 'debate' with someone that sees things in only black and white and I especially refuse to debate the inner workings of onestop with someone that obviously knows nothing.
have a great day! :)
Also, to say that ONESTOP wants to be the photoblogging community's "latex salesman" is just plain insulting.
Huh? That was a Seinfeld reference for the sake of a Seinfeld reference. (Go here and scroll to the very end.) Nothing to do with condoms whatsoever, if that's what you're thinking.
I never got into Seinfeld, so haven't seen many episodes...I took the statement for what it was.
Keven! It is not the largest photography festival because of ONESTOP! It's the largest festival because it happens in more than 200 venues around the city. ONESTOP/TTC is one venue, even if it is running on 143 TTC screens.
ONESTOP isn't even claiming that they're the reason anyway, but I could project photos onto the roof of the Rogers Centre and call it the "largest" festival in the world. ONESTOP is so insignificant to CONTACT that they're only mentioned on the website once in a tiny press release. Still, I love that they're one of the exhibition venues now.
Corporate sponsorship of the arts is unfortunately a necessity, but it often works really well (Bell for TIFF) and maybe not so well (tobacco companies for sports events). But the goodness of their hearts takes second place to the tax writeoffs, good PR, and free advertising that these companies get with such deals. Where the issue lies is whether or not it's worth it to the general public or the artists.
Also, am I the only one that never really watched Seinfeld or The Simpsons?
Sorry you're wrong. With onestop's viewership and screens as a venue it is now the LARGEST IN THE WORLD.
if you don't believe me get in touch the folks at CONTACT (it was announced at their press conference, to which you obviously weren't there), obviously the proof in form of internet articles isn't enough for you.
I could project photos onto the roof of the Rogers Centre and call it the "largest" festival in the world
Now you're just being stupid. Why don't you than? Because if you did, you would be.
ONESTOP is so insignificant to CONTACT that they're only mentioned on the website once in a tiny press release.
perhaps onestop isn't the media whore's you assumed they were and didn't bother to do a press release themselves as they are just happy contributing to this wonderful festival.
remember what I was saying before about being black or white?
OH NO IT'S PURPLE!!!!!!!!!!!
anyways, if this is going to turn into a debate (again) of my facts vs your opinions and negativity (glass half empty much?) than be ignorant I really don't care either way, it's your problem not mine.
godspeed.
CONTACT—which is fantastic and prideworthy—bills itself as the largest in the world because of the number of featured photographers (500+) factored with the number of venues (200+) over a time period of a month; not because a small number of the works are being featured on subway screens this year.
CONTACT—which is fantastic and prideworthy—bills itself as the largest in the world
No, CONTACT isn't the "biggest in the world" because of ONESTOP. Not by a long shot.
I think Keven is simply saying that once ONESTOP was added to CONTACT, that its addition made the festival the largest in the world
http://blogto.com/contact_2007/2007/04/transit_stories/
http://www.canada.com/cityguides/toronto/story.html?id=7ad0cfcc-291b-40ce-b84d-e1dcae8a1b6f
*taps nose*
Neither article you link to mentions ONESTOP being the reason for the "world's largest" claim except for your own comment within the BlogTO entry.
I'm not slamming ONESTOP, and I hope they do well for themselves (I went to school with Mike Girgis and he's a great guy), and I've mentioned that I create ads for a living. I do have problems with bureaucrats who make stupid deals and hand over a disproportionate amount of power to the private sector, which really has nothing to do with the CONTACT festival other than being a hosting venue or sponsor.
I think it's also important, when presenting your point so aggressively, to mention that you've actually worked for ONESTOP as the lead web developer.
For the record, I think that CONTACT's involvement with ONESTOP is a good thing, and I might submit some of my 69 photos to the project.
like I said, get in touch with the folks at Contact if you dont' believe me
ignorance is bliss, I was at the press conference, you obviously weren't.
I also hate to inform you, but I don't work for onestop media as a web developer.
You're on a roll with your bad factoids today eh?
You shouldn't just make stuff up to illustrate your points, that's called lying and it's ethically bad to do.
It also exposes how desperate you are to be heard and be proven 'correct'
:)
You're saying you haven't worked for ONESTOP?
Your own words:
Occupation: Web Developer
Industry: Advertising
Company / Institution: ONESTOP media group
Job Title: Lead Developer
"I think Crimestoppers and the City of Toronto would disagree with you on that one."
I have a response to this, but I first want to get confirmation of my second-hand information, so I don't end up writing something incorrect.
"...as opposed to all the LED signs that never worked or weren't maintained by the TTC?"
Yes. The "Metron" signs are, I believe, also private and ad-funded (the ones at York Mills still display kennel ads 24/7), but at least the time is visible from a good distance away. York Mills is my home station, and there are Metron signs on either side of the platform about halfway down. The escalators down to the platform are at the very north end (few people use the ones at the very south), and I like the fact that I can see the time as soon as I step off them. I worry about the day when they're replaced by ONESTOP screens, because I'd have to venture about a third of the way down the platform to make out the time, and I generally like staying at the very north end (because I usually get off at Bloor station to transfer east/west).
"So why are you so concerned with what time it is when you're on a TTC platform if you refuse to buy a watch, it's now suddenly the TTC or Onestop's responsibility to keep you informed of the time?"
Yes. I believe that informing riders of the time was the very rationale behind the TTC contracting ONESTOP. But now that "street furniture" is close to wrapping up for the next six months or so, I hope to finally have a minute to get myself a cell phone.
"I also find it rather amusing that a site that has 2 advertising spots on it's homepage (one more than the Onestop screens) is complaining about advertising any where else."
I'm going to repost something I wrote in the comments for "street furniture" last week when someone said something similar; I hope you don't mind:
To these I would add that advertising in public space (including the TTC) leaves one with little or no freedom of choice to not view an advertisement at a given moment.
If I don't want to look at the ads on Torontoist, I can either not come here or simply scroll down the page. And just because there are two ad spaces on Torontoist by no means makes them more intrusive than those on a ONESTOP screen. But even if you're going by the total number of ads, each ONESTOP screen has at least two (the main ad space and the CityTV space) but often three (the "time banner logo").
"The contact photography festival is now the LARGEST in the world with Onestop's contribution of their screens as 'gallery space'..."
This seems to be the most contentious point, but I only have a little to add. This argument reminds me of the idea Mez put forward a year and a half ago, to replace all the ads in the TTC with art. He said that the TTC would be "the largest indoor art gallery in the world." I understand how CONTACT might be making a similar case, but the fact that each photo (or each montage of photos) is only displayed for a couple minutes every hour seems to render the point moot.
If the screens were entirely (or mostly) turned over to CONTACT, then I would probably accept that CONTACT has expanded to the degree claimed. But I think the concept of permanence is fairly key to an exhibition of art or photography; the works remain on display, at least as long as the gallery is open, and are not merely shown in fleeting glimpses (unless that's the point of the work). While this doesn't necessarily make the ONESTOP screens inappropriate venues for art or photography, I think it's misleading to count their collective area in the same way as those of galleries and other venues (even billboards) at which the work is perpetually on display.
"...the TPSC is finding something to whine about, in amidst no one at city hall listening to them about the street furniture bid (a bit of projection going on?)."
I actually wrote this article a week and a half ago.
"2 minutes of time checks"
They actually offer "time check sponsorship," which is exactly what it sounds like.
Sorry those details are a mistake, I work for Fourth Wall Media in Toronto
I mean you read it on the internet, so it MUST be true, right? :P
Anyways, you're now trying to make this a personal thing, obviously grasping for straws pretty hard by digging for my personal information on the internet.
these are the only facts I'm presenting, and if you feel i'm doing so aggressively it's probably because you keep refusing to see them for what they are (the truth)
- Contact is now the largest photo festival in the world with the installation of onestop's screens.
ONESTOP is a client of Fourth Wall Media. The bottom of every page on the ONESTOP website says "Powered by FOURTHWALLMEDIA."
From the Fourth Wall Media website:
Check this out.
you're right!
Because I work at Fourth Wall Media that means that Contact is not in fact the largest photography festival in the world
:P
Jesus Christ, nobody has been arguing that CONTACT isn't the biggest photography festival in the world. Keven, people are disagreeing with you about your assertion that ONESTOP's involvement is the most significant cause of that accomplishment.
Can we drop this shit now?
I believe you, Keven, that that statement was indeed made at the press conference, but I think it's misleading for the reasons I outline in comment #37. I'm not doubting your integrity. Rather, I believe that those claims should be evaluated critically, as one should in any context in which an organization engages in self-promotion (such as at a press conference).
Torontoist has had many open calls for writers, which draw a lot of people who have points to make or expertise in a certain area, and they're selected based on their ability to put a sentence together coupled with having something interesting to write about. That's it.
Comparing Torontoist to an advertising company because one writer is an anti-ad activist is a straw man argument.
As I do not currently write for Torontoist I was not speaking in the royal WE and saying TOist is an advertising company.
What I was trying to imply was that we writers, bloggers, activists.. etc are guilty of the same things as advertisers. We like to put our conte