Monday, December 1, 2008

Catch 22@PJ: Directional Sign vs Advertising Sign


I noticed the orientation of this board during my travel to Kota Damansara recently. The siting of advertising is favoured towards the incoming traffic, the reverse side showing the information of direction is not visible to the traffic. This indicates the priority is given to the advertising purpose. While some might argue that it is a conduct of securing advertisement or else the direction sign cannot be put up. The advertisers need funding to cross subsidy the cost of erecting the board. Well, it is true that mileage should be given to the sponsor and nobody will dispute it. However, it is wrong if the exercise does not serve the intended purpose, that is providing information to the motorists. No point of having an information oriented structure if it will not benefit the users. It is a practice of taking advantage, and thus a pure business venture. We are in the Catch 22 situation. While directional sign to provide information is required, the practice of prioritising advertising is unnecessary.
Contribution from private sector for infrastructure and public facilities is most welcome. While it is a corporate social responsibility, the good gesture will help in reducing the burden of MBPJ in providing the facilities. The contribution is definitely needed. Having said this, minimum guideline is required so that the provision is having more social objectives rather than the perception of having more economic returns. I believe the sponsors will not mind to contribute directly towards the good cause and with a minimum exposure if proper publicity has been given from the beginning. Perhaps, innovative marketing strategies from MBPJ is required. A total package encompassing the cost and benefit to stakeholders, namely the users and sponsors is important.

No comments: