City’s “Lose the Roaditude” Campaign: Condescending or Helpful?
Posted By Thomas Bahde on September 1, 2009
The City of San Diego’s new “Lose the Roaditude” campaign has now launched, including a full line of posters to help get the safety message across. Here are the bicycle-related posters. So, what do you think, are these condescending or helpful? What other messages might the city have chosen to highlight that would have been more useful? Keep in mind that the campaign seeks to appeal both to experienced road users who perhaps need a reminder not to crash into each other and to inexperienced users who haven’t figured that out yet. Click for full images.
I can see that it can be both depending upon the POV of the viewer.
I’d do something more along the lines of friendship, happiness, and love, but that’s me.
Also, roaditude is pretty much the dumbest new word of the year. It should totally get a prize for being so dumb. I make up new words all the time, and I would struggle to make up such a stupid sounding word.
If I had roaditude, the signs would make me even more pissed.
However, I do like the idea that the city is making an attempt to allow people to get along.
In many ways, it reminds me of the “Just Say No” ads. Now I’m depressed.
Yep, the campaign is a good idea, but the name roaditude is just lame, lame, lame. Also, they could have designed a better icon for the guy riding the bike. I would say most riders are a little more upright when riding. Something just does not look right about it…
I agree that the title of the campaign is problematic, as Fred points out, because it’s so confrontational. It would be a lot better if the message was more positive. Rather than “lose” why don’t we focus on what we gain by being civil to each other and not running each other down?
Also, the design for the whole campaign is just terrible. Something truly iconic and well-designed would be a blessing around here because people could truly get behind it. As it is, the whole thing seems slightly abstract–generic stick figures with creepy smiley faces that almost make me *want* to run them down!
Who spends money on things like this? You could fund a bike locker with the amount they spent on this.
I’ve taken a look at these thoroughly and believe they are neither condescending nor helpful. Finding them condescending would probably arise from the viewers own experience or people taking the poster too emotionally. (i.e. getting offended at the “roaditude” term or the “I already know” complex) The style the posters are done are bright and cute but are they necessary, and if so, how necessary are they truly? What else can we spend our money and resources on? I hate to use this but “think outside the box”. Posters, seminars, speakers, etc. have been done already yet everyone readily admits there’s still a problem ergo they haven’t worked and there’s no indication that their going to start working.
Good comments. This is the city’s first try at a public education campaign about driving, walking, and bicycling, so there’s definitely a lot to learn. Suggestions for what messages should be out there, how they should look, etc, appreciated!
Just want to point out that these four are not all of the signs offered by the campaign. There are also many aimed at drivers, including ones encouraging them not to run red lights and to stop before the crosswalk line. From a cyclist’s perspective I think those are helpful.
My favorite of these is the “Share the Road: These Lanes Are Bike Lanes Too” sign. I think it’s a good thing to reinforce to drivers that bikes do belong (at times) in the center of the vehicle lane, and not always in the bike lane or the extreme right-hand side of the road.
I don’t really have an opinion on the style of the design. I suppose stick figures are pretty passe by now.
As for campaigns like this not having worked in the past, maybe I missed previous campaigns encouraging drivers to share the road with bikes.