Just to prove that someone reads this blog, I had the following e-mail from Steve Connor of Creative Concern re: yesterday's post:
"Hi Mark
I read your blog about the Yes campaign ads and would be happy to discuss further if you have time (we worked on them).
The 'I won't have to pay' line for example was critical for us, as all of our evidence suggested that a massive number of people hadn't taken on board the limited nature of the charging element of the £3 billion package. Genuinely people thought they'd pay during the day, at weekends, whilst shopping etc etc.
Anyway genuinely pleased to get any feedback or answer any questions.
Kind regards
Steve"
On the basis that I always aim for fairness and balance, I spoke to Steve this morning.
He reiterated that the intention behind the adverts was to dispel widespread misapprehension among the populace of Greater Manchester that the congestion charge would cover much greater periods of time than it actually will (7 to 9.30am incoming and 4 to 6.30pm outgoing), and thus to reassure people that off-peak journeys will not attract the charge.
In this respect he pointed out a detail which I will admit had escaped me, that the people in the ads are not in general smiling or looking particularly happy - this was apparently a conscious effort to avoid the risk of appearing to appeal to pure self-interest (although obviously lost on me!) I guess the problem with this is that you pass the ads on a tram etc and don't get chance to register the detail.
He also pointed out the following advantages of the scheme, in addition to the predicted 6% reduction in CO2 emissions:
Noise reduction
Investment in cycling and walking routes
A city wide cycle hire scheme.
I would like to thank Steve for taking the trouble to respond to the post (his reward is that I am passing on his comments) and to remind other readers that I welcome feedback, clarification or plain disagreement with any of the personal opinions that I express in this blog.
Mark Simpson
4 November 2008
Comments