Join 3,496 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Pssst. Hey buddy: wanna name a bridge?
February 5, 2002 8:34 PM   Subscribe

Pssst. Hey buddy: wanna name a bridge? Nothing is sacred. Or public.
posted by ParisParamus (12 comments total)

 
At least they're not selling the actual streets.

Besides, AOL/Time Warner Central Park just kind of rolls off the tongue.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 8:46 PM on February 5, 2002


Attention Corporate Scumbags:

Stop it. Seriously. This is getting ridiculous.
posted by Optamystic at 8:57 PM on February 5, 2002


"Gee, Mom, can we go to the top of the Microsoft State Building?"

"Yes, son, as soon as we get to New York Citi. There's so much traffic on the Verizon Narrows Bridge today."
posted by evanizer at 9:17 PM on February 5, 2002


And I thought Deep Space Nine and the Ferengi's were fiction. I'll bet if we ran Quark for president he'd be elected... Oh yea, he was.
posted by onegoodmove at 9:20 PM on February 5, 2002


What I would go for is corporate sponsorship of subway stations, especially to fund the 2nd Ave. Subway. But parks are, or should be sacred.
posted by ParisParamus at 9:22 PM on February 5, 2002


I, for one, am for these corporate scumbags. If they're willing to dish out huge wads of cash for the city in return for an advertising opportunity, why not? I'm sure the fine folks at Kabul Zoo really wouldn't mind being well fed, well dressed and well stocked with spare change in exchange for their zoo being called, say, DaimlerChrysler Zoo. And perhaps the general public of Tirana really wouldn't mind some added income in exchange for corporate sponsorship of their parks.

Things are sacred when there are the means to make them sacred.
posted by dai at 9:45 PM on February 5, 2002


Strange. The logical reaction to a budget deficit is to raise taxes and lower spending. Has this not occurred to Bloomberg?
posted by salmacis at 12:56 AM on February 6, 2002


Soon it will be neighborhoods.. where do you live? Oh in IluvPepsi. On Cool-Refreshing street.

The buzzword will be 'unavoidable advertising' in that you can't help but speak the words IluvPepsi 10 times per day.

Enforced viral marketing. "where's your new place?" "oh on mLife avenue." "what's that?" "we don't know yet, some kind of insurance thing I think."
posted by chaz at 1:09 AM on February 6, 2002


"Well, congratulations, you've got the job, Ms Smith. Or should I say, Ms GlaxoSmithKline®-Smith? {chortle chortle}. Welcome aboard. Make sure you get the name-change forms and trademark permissions from Ms GlaxoSmithKline®-McGillicuddy on the way out."
posted by pracowity at 3:42 AM on February 6, 2002


dai says: I, for one, am for these corporate scumbags. If they're willing to dish out huge wads of cash for the city in return for an advertising opportunity, why not?

Yeah, but this is really just passing the buck (pun intended). We as a society value things -- like parks and subways and roads and theatres and other fun things. It was accepted in the time of the nation state, that your nation would charge taxes to pay for the building and maintainence of those things.

But now alas, they can't. People want to a lot. And they're not willing to pay for it -- at least not here. (Unlike in Europe where all the cities have nice public transport, great schools, good libraries, and mueseums that are paid for by... you guessed it, high taxes.)

So now we let the shareholders of companies pay for it. This is bad IMO for a couple of reasons: Companies do it for the wrong reasons, they go out of business (enron - doh!), they don't run or manage the parks very well (since for them, it's a marketing expense), the corporate life starts to invade the public life -- Can you bring your own coke prodcuts to an event at 'Pepsi Arena'?

Bottom line: somebody's got to pay. Might as well make it somebody accountable.
posted by zpousman at 6:41 AM on February 6, 2002


I know that these things are vestiges of Giuliani, but Bloomberg doesn't seem to have a problem with the $900 million given to the stock exchange and all the public money given to the Yankees and the Mets. So why sell out the parks? Just stop the handouts to corporations, and you've got a balanced budget.
posted by panopticon at 7:00 AM on February 6, 2002


I'm all for it, as long as the price is right. Lots of stadium renamings got sold off at sweetheart prices -- If we're going to rename Shea Stadium or the Grand Central Terminal, I want the city to get hundreds of millions for it, at least.
posted by MattD at 7:31 AM on February 6, 2002


« Older Researchers at the University of Utah and Ohio Sta...  |  The Bad Taste Tour of Branson,... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments