The Media Buzz On Fly Posting
New research has revealed the extent to which the issue of illegal fly posting divides the industry, with creative directors in the main supporting the “guerrilla” tactic and media directors condemning it, while acknowledging clients’ desire for the street credibility it can command.
A survey by outdoor specialists Concord found that 77% of creative directors supported the practice of fly posting and that the same amount would bow to the pressure of clients wanting to use it. Meanwhile, although 80% of media directors condemned the activity, 44% said that if a client insisted, they would give in.
A cynic may argue that media agencies’ beef with fly posting stems from the fact that it doesn’t involve them selling space. However, they have some strong arguments on their side: “One person’s cutting edge communication is another’s irritating pollutant. Fly posting is generally pretty vile and certainly indefensible when it obscures paid for media space” argued James Whitmore, head of media at The Media Edge.
Representatives of London’s councils tend to agree, with Steve Gladwin of Camden Council stating: “Fly posting encourages graffiti and severely damages the appearance of an area, causing it to look and feel ‘crime-ridden’. The removal of illegal posters costs Camden Council over £100k each year.” Ivor Jones of Westminster City Council added: “Illegal fly-posting is a blight on the street scene, is tacky and spoils the overall look of the city.”
Stating fly posting’s illegality is no idle threat, as Camden Council has successfully prosecuted seven mainstream companies for it recently, including EMI and Mercury Records. This is another disincentive to the media agencies: “Irrespective of whether fly posting is a creative or effective way of advertising it is illegal.” said Jim Marshall, chief executive of MediaVest, “As a company we are absolutely not in the business of committing crimes.”
Despite this, fly posting does not appear to be going away any time soon, especially since its creative role has now been acknowledge by industry awards. Simon Scott, joint creative director of The Union, explained: “It’s not appropriate for every client but it is a very vigorous and immediate medium and still has a nice anarchic thing going for it.”
Gerry Farrell, creative director for the Leith Agency, highlighted budget advantages of the approach, saying: “It’ll never have the impact of a proper legal poster campaign but a lot of advertisers don’t have big enough budgets to get their message across on proper sites.” However, Farrell went on to condemn brands with big budgets who had, he said, “no excuse and should stick to legal media.”
Fly posting does not receive complete approval from the creatives, then. Gill Sully, creative director of Travissully said: “We’ve been tempted, but its illegal and frankly as a resident of a very fly posted borough its hard to live with and eventually that turns you against the message/advertiser anyway.”
Matt Turrell, creative director of PTK said: “I think it does clutter up the environment. Eventually there will be too many and it won’t be guerrilla anymore. Fashions will eventually run their course.”
This may not occur fast enough for Nigel Mansell, MD of Concord: “Those who buy media are only too aware of how grubby fly posting is.” he said “As a responsible industry, collectively we ought to be looking for ways to stamp it out. For so many creative directors to be in support of it, quite frankly is worrying.”
Concord: 020 7543 4444 www.concord.co.uk
Subscribers can access further information on outdoor companies by selecting “Ambient” from the drop-down box at the top of this page.