November 8th, 2006
Pitfield releases attack ads on Miller
Posted by Matthew Blackett
Jane Pitfield released a full-page ad in today’s National Post that takes issue with most everything Mayor Miller has done in his first term [for larger version download PDF, 45k]. Other than her campaign logo and slogan (she has thankfully dropped the misplaced comma), the ad is devoid of any information on Ms. Pitfield, or how she will fix the problems she claims Miller has created. The only indication that her campaign may address her own platform is the cut-corner in the bottom right: “Stay tuned for Jane Pitfield’s vision for Toronto.” I don’t think it’s unfair of me to suggest that her vision should’ve been out in the public long ago.
From a graphic design perspective, it’s extremely unattractive. It would be a challenge to convince any reader to stop and read the entire thing. As a graphic designer, the first rule I learned about creating advertisements: people like pictures and graphics. Her ad looks more like a City of Toronto notice to fix a sewer.
Instead, her campaign team could’ve used a big picture of Jane, quickly outlined her beefs with Miller and not gone into detail, placed a large web address somewhere which would encourage people to visit her site for the important details,. This kind of strategy would have allowed them to gauge how many people are taking the ad seriously.
While Pitfield has taken the manifesto route, Miller’s campaign has a concise, yet specific, ad directed at Pitfield.
While most of Pitfield’s digs at Miller have become staples in her stump speeches, she has added a new, and curiously bizarre, point of contention: Miller opposes bringing an NFL franchise to Toronto despite wide public support. How does the NFL have anything to do with the current mayoral race? Sure, the NFL would boost the local economy for eight games a season, as well as increase the city’s collective cholesterol count thanks to the pre-game tailgate parties. But to put it in her campaign literature?
I might be over-analyzing this, but could this have something to do with Ted Rogers (Rogers Communication owns the Blue Jays) and his buddy Larry Tanenbaum (owner of the Leafs and Rartors) who are the only people in the city with deep enough pockets that could bring an NFL franchise to Toronto.
And guess whose name is on the just-released list of donors to Ms. Pitfield’s campaign? Tanenbaum, Lawrence. Sadly, no dollar figures were attached to any of the 600 donations.
The only lengthy quote from Miller on NFL expansion came on Sept. 8th, 2006 — he said he’s more concerned with the CFL’s well-being and Toronto’s long history with the Argonauts:
“If private people want to raise a billion dollars for the NFL franchise, good for them,” Miller said. “But the health of the CFL is very important to this city and to the country and I don’t want to see anything happen that’s going to risk this league.”
Miller, who lived in Boston for a time, also doesn’t see the NFL expanding into Canada under any circumstances.
“My understanding is the NFL doesn’t seem overly interested in expanding into Canada. My concern is the viability of the CFL. It’s our Canadian league and the Toronto Argonauts have to be a flagship franchise in that league for the league to succeed.”
I’m anxious to see her next set of ads and hope Pitfield’s campaign team uses the valuable space in newspapers to address her own platform. Trumpeting yourself as the protest vote will only get you so far.
Loading ...
Comments
His flipflop ads were so much cooler…and the uppercase letters in the “Disappoints Daily” line make me cringe.
Comment by Karen
November 8, 2006 @ 8:02 pm
I wonder what Pitfield’s plan is to bring the NFL to Toronto. Maybe she’ll buy 2 players a year until we have a complete team.
Comment by Val
November 8, 2006 @ 9:38 pm
Who are these supposed “supporters” of Jane Pitfield, I wonder?
Comment by Lou DeChris
November 8, 2006 @ 11:19 pm
She forgot to mention that Miller likes to watch his children play hockey, rather than the Toronto Maple Leafs, or the Marlies, which means he is denying concession stand workers revenue each night he is absent from either team’s games.
And eating babies. He doesn’t say he supports, but he hasn’t said he -doesn’t- support it, either.
Comment by Luis
November 8, 2006 @ 11:51 pm
What a joke of a candidate she is. She seems to have done okay as a ward councillor but she has zero vision for anything but keeping the city bumbling along.
2.5 million people and this is seriously the best we can do? Miller and the muppet show?
Comment by Mark Dowling
November 9, 2006 @ 11:02 am
1) Jane Pitfield is on City Council. That means she bears some resposibility for what has happend over the last three years. (We have a “weak mayor” system unlike some American cities. This limits the power of the mayor.)
2) Mayor Miller has not been on the TTC for the last half of this term-i.e 18 months.
This is when the wildcat strike occurred and this is when the subway car decision was made. The TTC, while made up of city councillors, is an autonomous body unlike committeees of council. Its decsions don’t go to City Council for approval.
3) The St. Clair ROW debacle has nothing to do with the LRT’s and exclusive lanes. Rather there were a number of other factors involved.
-A court challenge delayed the project but the TTC had already started some preliminary work.
-Every other city department seemed to get involved. (”A camel is a horse designed by committee.”)
Comment by Kevin Reidy
November 9, 2006 @ 6:24 pm