Does advertising work? Depends on whether those encountering the 139 billboards promoting CityBillboardTax.ca engineer empathy for the message from the Out-of-Home Marketing Association of Canada — tricky when the single-serving site is a charmless document outlining reasons to oppose the new sign-related legislation City Council will vote on next week: “The City of Toronto is the single largest beneficiary of revenue from the outdoor advertising industry,” concludes their view on the by-law. “OMAC members contribute $36.8 million in average annual revenue to the city through current lease agreements.” And why seek $8.6 million in tax revenue when they haven’t disclosed what they plan to do with it? OMAC argues that they contribute $28.4 million in annual revenue to private property owners, and donate $6 million in free space to local charities — but, this week, the charity is their own. “In a post-recession period of economic recovery, it simply does not make sense to put this economic contribution at risk into a law a flawed and poorly conceived by-law” [sic!] The crusader who initiated so much illegal sign-busting, Rami Tabello, was on OMAC’s case about their numbers a month ago. Meanwhile, a more aesthetically pleasing argument can be found at BeautifulCity.ca: their petition asks to have the revenues steered to public space improvement, community resources, and artistic initiatives — maybe inspiring better work from the lobbyists reponsible for CityBillboardTax.ca. “I’m sorry, a professional MARKETING association launched this site?” tweeted Chris Tindal. “Maybe we need a tax on awfulness.”
UPDATE: OMAC evidently hired a web designer later that day to improve CityBillboardTax.ca.






