Letters : Councilman Braude and Outdoor Advertising

Ever see Marvin Braude dance? I have. He looks just as ridiculous as he does in that photo of him with the article on signs (March 19). But everything he’s been screaming about for over 15 years--visual pollution and that demon outdoor advertising--is hardly visible among the overwhelming amount of on-site signs on Ventura Boulevard. A careful examination of the photo of the street reveals two off-site outdoor advertisements: one for that devilish division of General Motors, Chevrolet, the other for Marlboro.

What is visible is the tremendous retail growth along Ventura Boulevard. While Braude has set his “sites” on the outdoor advertising industry, high-rise and retail of all kinds have enveloped Ventura Boulevard. But how ya gonna keep ‘em down on the farm? Los Angeles continues to grow. It will never stop. Look at Warner Center, Del Amo, downtown. Ventura Boulevard is part of this excitement. On-site signs have proliferated, but so have on-site businesses which must be identified.

Back to outdoor advertising as growled at by Mr. Braude. What this new ordinance is seeking to reintroduce is something called “overlaying.” In other words, setting up special ordinances for certain areas which are more restrictive for this area alone. The heck with the rest of the city.

The outdoor advertising industry is not “insatiable and greedy,” but it is trying to stay alive. Encino is hardly “Tijuana North.” It’s got street signs. “Visual pollution,” “visual mess,” “ugly”? No way. Few industries worldwide police themselves more assiduously than does the outdoor advertising industry. None tries harder to work with city, county and state officials, and with interested groups in the private sector, than does the outdoor advertising industry. Trouble is, while people in private areas willingly and successfully work with the industry, public officials like Marvin Braude refuse to cooperate in developing ordinances equitable for all.

While Marvin Braude harks back to the old “powerful lobby” label he delights in hanging on this industry and its parallel typing of outdoor advertising as a giant group of megabuck greedy “politicians,” I suggest he read a portion of the new 1984 Business Week annual report. He might find out that 99 companies listed therein had first quarter sales larger than the sales of the entire outdoor advertising industry put together on an annual basis. He would also see that over 200 companies had annual sales figures greater than this industry’s newest total sales. I used to hear about the $2-billion outdoor advertising lobby. Whatever happened to that one?

Outdoor advertising is responsive, responsible, capable and colorful. But it does not work well together--here or elsewhere. I call on the industry to work together, even band together. Your day of reckoning may be at hand. You’ll never be forbidden but you may be denied any expansion. For every sign a new ordinance forces you to remove, you must be compensated.

The Times should examine what’s new in outdoor advertising--the fascinating use of fiber optics, the new methods of illuminating signs so as not to disturb others, the new ways of measuring the audience. Ask questions. You’ll like the people you meet and you’ll get a brand new picture of outdoor advertising.

PAUL D. BLOCH

Chatsworth