Hey, there! Log in / Register
Boylston holstered the still smoking gun - the cops were on their way, armed with questions he wasn't ready to answer
By adamg on Wed, 06/27/2012 - 8:40am
News item: MBTA may sell station names - and one of the first of the new stations could be Emerson Boylston.
Emerson Boylston knew what they say: Gentlemen never drink before 11 a.m. or east of Tremont.
Boylston was no gentleman. As he sat in his office on the wrong side of Tremont, he was pouring his second shot of the morning when his first appointment of the day walked in. Samantha Lowell tried apologizing for being late - something about falling asleep on the train and only being jolted awake at Peoples Federal Savings Bank State Street ...
Earlier:
New 'n' improved MBTA map.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
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
Corollary: Threaten to
Corollary: Threaten to rename Ruggles after Northeastern unless they pay out a million bajillion dollars. They'll do it.
Dying to see which
hipster shithole grabs Harvard Sq station. My money's on Pinkberry.
how is
pink berry hipster?
If you see more than two people in there at the same time
wearing those stupid hats ( as I have) then it's a hipster joint.
Please clarify
Which hats are the stupid ones?
You know, those wannabe Bing Crosby hats
hipsters are so fond of. Need examples? Just check out the local pictures feature on Boston.com, they have plenty!
They're called "trilbys"
Had you singled out either trucker caps or stocking caps worn in 90F heat for derision as an ill-chosen tribal marker, I'd have been right there with you. Personally, I think the trilbys and fedoras are the closest thing to normal adult human apparel these kids ever seem to wear (especially the boys), and should be encouraged, along with things like trousers that fit and shirts without writing on them.
Disclaimer: I have a dog in the headwear fight, but nobody in their right mind would ever think I was a hipster (an old punk or goth, sure, but hipster?)
Well, I agree with you on the fedora...
I wear a black Stetson fedora in the winter for work. I also sport a lovely vintage cashmere topcoat. One time a female client asked me if I was her driver or her Rabbi....
And you said?
"I'm not your rav, but I have a lovely drash for you if you want to take the scenic route"? Nu? Don't leave us hanging, man.
Sorry, being Italian..
I always say I'm Enzo the Baker.
Yale.
.
MIT
MIT
Open Memo to any company considering this
No matter what personal cost to me, I will do everything and anything to avoid the use of your products and services if you purchase a station name.
The only exception I will make is to maintain my partial season tickets with the Red Sox if they were dumb enough to buy Kenmore, however I won't buy a single concession inside the park ever again.
How about CITGO
Buying the Kenmore station? That would cause quite a bit of butthurt in some circles, outside of which I doubt anyone would care.
Once again
Why are we so willing to rent, lease, or just outright give away, public facilities to commercial interests so readily?
And for what? So private companies can market their products and services (the majority of which society doesn't need and easily can do without) to a captive audience. Like seeing the name Emerson on a subway station is really going to get throngs of prosepctive students to apply there.
This recent proliferation of advertising on the MBTA is no more than a wasteful use of resources. It is also very insulting to the passengers - when I'm running to get a train, the last thing I need to be distracted by is some useless ad shilling cheap cellphones or a "rent a car" service I don't need or some new soft drink (perhaps that's the real reason the faregates have the bulit-in delay - and why so many of them are out of service on any given day).
Public transportation is supposed to be just that - for the public. Not for commerical interests to use as a platform to foist their products. Yet, where's the public hearings on this proposal that clearly affects the quality of life for everyone using the MBTA system?
George Orwell got it wrong - It is not intrusion by the government into every aspect of our personal lives we have to fear - it is intrustion by the marketing executives. And, based on what's been happening over the past forty years, it's clear we are losing the war.
Excellent points and yet ...
Does anybody actually say "TD Garden" rather than just "the Garden"?
It'll be interesting to see what happens the first time a fire breaks out at Sovereign Bank State Street.
Thank you for demonstrating
another reason why applying naming rights to long established facilites doesn't work in the long run - people generally don't use the new name. Even in the Fleece - excuse me - Fleet Center days, many people still called the new building the "Garden".
And when people don't use the new name, generally the sponsor either a) wants to get out of the deal or b) will be unwilling to renew the contract. Even if the T had willing sponsors ready to step in to take over, just the logistics of having to always rename stations, and getting the riding public used to those constant name changes, boggles the mind.
This is why selling naming rights and other "saturation" campaigns (i.e. "Station Domination") are such bad ideas for a public transit agency like the T. Ever see a sponsor do a "Station Domination" more than once over a two year period? I sure haven't - and I've been riding the T daily for over 30 years.
But station naming has been so successful!
For the three Boston Universities, Northeastern, Kendall/MIT, and Harvard!
Great Start Adam
I can't wait for the rest of this MBTA-themed pulp fiction.
Because the T needs the money
Because the T needs the money this is worth a try. However, I hope we don't get any stations named after banks/insurance companies.
If this works for the T then perhaps the city could could raise some much needed money by branding the Freedom Trail; some of the money raised could be used for upkeep and improvement.
With respect, your reasoning is exactly one of the reasons
why we as a society are continuing to be increasingly inundated and over-saturated with needless advertising messages that shill products that are largely unecessary for society to function. Why you say? Because we so willing to let it happen to us.
Advertising is largely wasteful by its nature (why do we need 27 separate "ZipCar" decals on every faregate when one large poster will get the same message across?), and promotes even more waste in industry (why do we need so many different cellphone providers, each one operating off their own system, when two or three models of phone all using one OS will suffice?)
And if you think advertising and marketing is so good for society, consider this. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, between one and two minutes of every television half-hour was set aside for commercials. Today, that figure is about fourteen minutes of every half hour. Almost half the program consists of commercials now. And to make matters ever worse, the older shows are edited down to reach that "magic" fourteen minute mark.
I don't know about you, but when I watch TV, I'd like to see some actual programming instead of companies shilling their overpriced and largely needless wares.
And I'll repeat what I said earlier in this and other posts. We as a society are already totally overwhelmed with needless and wasteful marketing messages at every turn (even on this Internet site). We don't need even more of this wasteful and self-serving practice, especially while riding a public transportation system.
We have to start ridding ourselves of the notion that everything the private sector does, including marketing and advertising, is inherently good and should be encouraged at every turn. Because, frankly, in the larger scheme of things, it's not good at all.
Yes, I acknowlege that the MBTA has some very serious financial issues. However, selling off station names to the highest bidders will barely make a dent in the T's bottom line, and is not a viable solution that will solve the T's problems in the long term.
But, yet again, this is the type of "reform" you get when you have accountants and political appointees running what is supposed to be a transportation system, and not an auction house available for sale to the highest bidder.
Ok, I considered it
what are you talking about?
"And if you think advertising and marketing is so good for society, consider this. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, between one and two minutes of every television half-hour was set aside for commercials. Today, that figure is about fourteen minutes of every half hour. Almost half the program consists of commercials now. And to make matters ever worse, the older shows are edited down to reach that "magic" fourteen minute mark."
So in the 60s and 70s, TV was terrible compared to today, even with the advertisements. To me, especially given the options to DVR programs and skip ads, TV is 1000x better today then then. (Note- I understand that you would not like 'Mad Men' given that it is about evil, evil advertisers! We'll leave that out of the discussion.)
As far as society, I wasn't alive but I have certainly read a lot about the civil rights movement in the 60s and the issues such as busing which were so divisive in Boston then. I guess you're saying society would have been more racist then if there were even more ads? Or there would be even less opportunities for previously disadvantaged groups such as gays, women or minorities? I can't see where advertising is one of the primary corrosive forces causing society problems in the US today.
I get it, you don't like ads. You don't seem to think selling advertising is a valid way to fund anything. I can't see how that ties into the ills of 'society' today.
I also like how to take a shot at Adam for trying to pay for this site which he allows us to post on for having 'needless and wasteful marketing messages'. Have you ever sent Adam a check or paypal payment then?
Take a look at Greece if you want to see what happens when 'accountants' aren't involved in trying to finance public works. Honestly, if we can't have accountants involved, then are we as tax payers just supposed to pay some mysterious benevolent group to run the MBTA with no consideration for how to pay for it?
Maybe read something other than Adbusters once in a while and you might understand how the world actually works instead of just raging about how you want it to work.
ads and public services
I'd agree with Roadman that I don't like the idea of advertizing on every square inch of everything around me, but really the people have spoken. They want everything and they don't want to pay for what it really costs. You may notice the people are a bit moronic.
No one wants to pay for any public service any more because: 1/ it's all going to those tax sucking hacks, 2/ they're completely incompetent nincompoops in the public sector, not like the Jesus clones running the private sector..you know like the bankers and stockbrokers, 3/ I don't use it, so fuck it. That basically sums up the U.S. attitude about anything that could be called a "common wealth." The "tragedy of the commons" is writ large around here, and we're supposedly the hippy, liberal state! There's some suburb of Atlanta that has outsourced its entire municipal infrastructure. There's like 3 or 4 actual employees, everything else is contracted out to private companies. It's where we're headed. Which means we'll soon all be indentured serfs. Or maybe this is just the grapa talking...
While there clearly was some bad TV
in the 1960s and early 1970s, in general, the overall quality of television was, IMO, much better than today.
Now you have far too many "reality format" shows and the "monkey see, monkey do" philosophy of programming (his channel has two pawn broker shows, so my channel need THREEs pawn broker shows). This is even worse now because of the fact the programs are interrupted far too often for even more commercials.
Yes, I don't like ads for all the reasons I've previously stated. But the fact many people have a DVR is not a justification for increasingly inundating society with needless messages that are largely a waste of time and money.
Perhaps if more people started questioning how the world currently works instead of blindly accepting the staus quo and having a "that's how thimgs are, deal with it" attitute to people who are willing to question how the world works, I believe that society would be much better off.
And to reiteriate: the MBTA is a public transportation system that is largely paid for with public taxes. The people who use that system shouldn't be subjected to advertising thaat boosts profits of private companies.
And if you buy the MBTA's arguments about "needing the money", and truly believe that advertising and marketing are such great and necessary things for humanity and socitety, then why can't I put a McDonald's banner on the side of my privately owned house in exchange for them paying my property taxes.
BTW, I didn't mean my comments about ads on Internet sites as a slight against Adam. But then again, UHub isn't funded with my taxes either.
And if you buy the MBTA's
Why can't you? I know that it happens, and likewise with private automobiles. Is this another Massachusetts idiosyncrasy?
Figures Are Incorrect
Believe me, I'm no fan of commercials (even though I sometimes make my living via voicing and/or producing them) but your figures are exaggerations. It doesn't bolster your argument when you exaggerate so.
Most network half-hours from the 60's and 70's were timed out to about 26 minutes, leaving four minutes for either commercials, PSAs, or station identifiers. All that's needed to verify this is to look at the timings of various older shows offered on Blu-Ray or DVD.
The timings are shorter now, to be sure, but 14 minutes of commercials per half hour? It may be possible that somewhere, sometime, you've run across such a thing, but it's certainly not the norm. About 23 or 24 minutes, leaving six or seven for ads, would be about right.
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
If accepting ugly ads means
If accepting ugly ads means that my bus route might not be cut during next years budget crisis, then I will accept the ads. I would prefer that the legislature come up with a fix for transit funding, but the MBTA can't force them to do that do they have to work with what they got.
No, they don't
Why does the transit agency think that threatening RIDERS with fare hikes will get people to accept things like route reductions...yet threatening the LEGISLATORS with the possibility of shutting down the whole system isn't a viable strategy? It's because of false choices like the one you're willing to accept.
If adding a spike to the middle of every seat was able to provide a cost reduction in some way, would you sit on the spike just to keep your route intact?
A spike would bother me and
A spike would bother me and could harm myself or others, ads don't bother me and they are harmless. Don't like em, then don't read em
Why should the ads be forced on the riders?
Especially when they're paying good money to ride the system.
With respect, it's attitudes like "don't like them, don't read them" that have allowed advertisers to increasingly invade every space and medium with more and more of their pointless messages shilling useless stuff that society can just as easily do without.
I have to laugh at you
I have to laugh at you thinking we are bombarded with more ads than ever. If you look at historic turn of the last century photographs you'll see far more posters, window lettering, flyers, billboards, sandwich boards, street hawkers, ads in newspapers, and other promotional materials than one typically sees in public today. The forms of advertising have changed, not so much the volume of it.
I Hate To See The Red Line High Speed Trolley Miss Out...
O-Cedar Grove
I Can't Believe It's Not Butler!
Comedy Central Avenue
Hidden Valley Road
Aunt Jemima's Mattapancakes
Selloutdog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
The High Speed Trolley
sounds delicious!
Might work for some stations
How about:
Kenmore-Is-Actually-Closer-to-Fenway-Park-Than-Fenway-Station
Pleasant Street/Agganis Arena
Maybe that'll stop people from running around like morons at those two stations.
Let's not be hasty about this: how much would it cost?
How much would it cost to get a bunch of people go in on a “People’s Station” and then take turns with the naming rights, the way the @Sweden account on Twitter works?
Love it. Bet we can get
Love it. Bet we can get 300,000 people at $5 apiece ($1.5 mil) and then hold a lottery once a year with 365 names to be the name of the day.
Not the first time they've tried it
(Am I the only one who remembers this??)
Fifteen years ago, the MBTA announced plans for a similar scheme.
The only taker was Citizens Bank. In December 1997 a 5-year contract was signed that changed the name of State station to State/Citizens Bank.
By early 2000 -- less than halfway through the 5-year deal -- all of the "Citizens Bank" signs in State station had disappeared. And when Aquarium station closed temporarily for construction in October 2000, new signs were put up changing the State name to State/Aquarium.
System maps in other stations had stick-on letters applied adding the Citizens Bank logo to the State name, but those fell off after a few months and were never replaced.
Roadman's earlier comments about people not being willing to use the new name, and therefore about potential sponsors not being willing to take the risk, are right on track.
After all, what bank would be willing to guarantee that it will still be operating under the same name eight years from now?
That'll help people find their way
Won't it be great when one company or institution buys naming rights for the station adjacent to its competitor? We could have the Beth Israel Deaconess Charles Street station on the Red line, or the Amtrak Logan Airport stop on the Blue line, or the Boston University Harvard Square station, etc.
That would really help people find their way around.