Skip to content

Canadian Urbanism Uncovered

Recommended

18 comments

  1. It was only after the 3rd view of that streetcar did i realize the car and kid were part of the ad, not a real life demo for the picture. Wow.

  2. You guys are fools. The ad is obscuring “STOP” signs on the doors of the streetcar and is a danger to pedestrians.

  3. It’s not obscuring the STOP sign. You can easily see it.

    lastly, it did not appear on streetcars. Its a print ad.

  4. Are you sure it didn’t appear on streetcars?

    From the original City Routes article: “The ad featuring a young child being struck by a vehicle was part of a streetcar ‘wrap’ that ran last year along various streets in Toronto.”

    From the Applied Arts website: “Streetcar doors opening and closing create effect of child being struck by car to raise awareness of pedestrian safety.”

    And the ADCC Awards website has photos of the doors open, closing, and closed. Not that the three photos couldn’t have been from a single magazine or newspaper ad.

    My knowledge of advertising industry jargon is limited, so I’ve just assumed that in the context of these awards “print” includes billboards and posters and similar things, distinct from radio and television ads.

  5. You could be right Joanthan, but the category is PRINT which means PRINT and not other forms of ads.

    And since I rode my bike all summer and take the TTC all other times, I never once saw this ad. Though I did see other ads from this ped safety campaign.

    This is the kind of advertising that SHOULD be on the TTC — internal city ads (festivals, services, etc). B

  6. I never saw it on a streetcar, either, which could eithe rmean that it is a print-only ad, or an ad designed specifically to win awards and only put on streetcar(s) long enough to qualify.

  7. According to a city newsletter (page 3, 453 KB PDF), it was a streetcar wrap. I didn’t see it either and wish I had.

    As for what print means, I’m also not an expert but on the ADCC awards page, “print” has a bunch of subcategories (list on the right) including billboard, poster, typography, and “transit” — the category the TTC’s ad was in.

  8. How does the stop sign help out pedestrians anyway? I admit I actually never paid any attention to them until now, since they’re red and white just like the streetcar.

    I will chime in and say that I’ve never before seen this wrap, which is too bad. It’s even catchier than the megabin ads (the ones where cars are smashed up running into pedestrians), which I found quite impressive.

  9. The stop sign is not directed at the pedestrian; it is directed at the motorist. (That’s why it’s only on the “motorist-facing” doors.)

  10. Dude, the streetcar doors have 4 STOP signs fora reason, the wrap is obstructing 2 of the signs, the bottom-most signs. Why don’t we just put ads for pedestrian safety on half the crosswalk lights Matt, same thing. This ad is a danger to pedestrians and transit users, and pedestrian advocates who doulbe as ad creap watchers should recognize that.

  11. There are only two stops signs on a streetcar door becuz two doors face forward and two face back. So your facts are wrong.

    on everything else you said, gimme a break, John. this is a not a danger and I think you’re over reacting. You make it sound like that the only reason people stop is becuz of those stop sign on the doors. What did they ever do before those stop signs were installed a few years back? Were drivers just mowing down transit riders coming out of the streetcar? No.

    I’m all for stopping ad creep and for advocating for pedestrian rights, but to say this ad endagners pedestrians is like saying weed leads to to cocaine use. Put a lid on the hyperbole and bitch about real dangers to pedestrians.

  12. I think what John’s saying is that there are two stop signs on each of the driver-facing doors; not that there’s one sign on each door.

    Still, he’s nitpicking.

  13. John, dude, I don’t think anybody appreciates being called a fool. I understand the point you are making, but you ought to see that people don’t necessarily agree with you. Myself, I find the ad clever, I’m glad they won an award, and I don’t think the absence of the “stop” is a problem.

  14. I take the streetcar every day and I barely notice the door stop signs, so I doubt the average motorist pays much attention. It seems to me that this ad would be much more effective in getting the message across.

  15. The motorist (or biker, for that matter) is more likely to pay attention; after all, the “Stop” is directed at *them*.

    And a lot of the time, that they don’t, or might not, isn’t because it “doesn’t work”; it’s simply because plenty of Torontonians *know* you’re supposed to stop when a streetcar’s doors open. They’re too acclimatized to notice and, er, “fixate”.

    Every little bit helps. One might as well suggest that schoolbuses should ditch their swivel “Stop” signs because the flashing lights are perfectly sufficient. (Not.)

  16. A moving, full-sized stop sign on a yellow bus is very different from a small, static sign that is pasted on a vehicle that is also red and white.

    Maybe streetcars need the kind of signs buses have.

  17. I agree with Gloria that the streetcars need bigger stop signs (similar to school buses).

    I know that when I started driving downtown, I didn’t even realize that you had to stop before the streetcar doors. Since I did 95% of my driving in Scarborough (where we have no streetcars) I wasn’t used to this at all.

    I still see cars driving through as the streetcar stops every once in a while. Thankfully, the speed of cars isn’t that fast (relatively) downtown.

    We shouldn’t assume that every driver knows to stop before the doors. What if they are new drivers, visitors to the City or driving in from the ‘burbs?

    Bigger stop signs is a great idea… maybe some lights too…