It is time for another addition of “Things That Tick Me Off”– the category that allows me to regain my composure by venting at annoying things in life. (It is far cheaper than therapy). This week’s winner is water billboards. I am in Ocean City, Maryland to speak on the Supreme Court as part of the Maryland State Bar Association‘s annual meeting. The conference is being held at the Clarion Resort on the beach. I arrive last night and took the kids to the beach. It was an amazing scene with huge waves and blue skies. As we took in the beauty, we were suddenly on confronted by a massive water billboard that moves slowly across the beach front, blocking the view and destroying the enjoyment of the beach. I must confess that this is the first time I have seen one of these monstrosities up close and I was appalled.
When we arrived, my youngest, Madie, asked what the “trucks” were doing on the water. She was pointing to huge signs that looked like floating 18-wheeler trucks passing slowly back and forth in front of the beach. BBi Displays is one company operating in the area. They have been destroying the view since at least 2007.
I do not understand why cities do not prohibit such commercial advertising off their beaches. Ocean City has been notorious for runaway development and a lack of city planning. However, one would think that this business directly undermines the beach experience for everyone. It strikes me as just above graffiti as a business enterprise. I have never like the planes dragging banners across beaches, but I understood that there might not be an easy way to deal with such advertisements (though I make a personal note never to do business with any store that uses the planes on beaches). However, at least you can look out on the ocean and ignore the plane. These water billboards block any view but the advertisement as it slowly moves along.
Unlike a plane, these water billboards also disrupt people who are boating and surfing near shore. The problem is that the objection is admittedly aesthetic for the most part. Aesthetic nuisances are often rejected by courts and that would be a question of a takings with a prohibition. However, cities are given a fair degree of leeway in regulating boating near shore. It would be worth a try and I would hope some local lawyers would volunteer to help the effort to rid the community of these obnoxious floating ads.
Cities like Miami now have these things floating constantly around tourists. One company calls it the “Wow” factor. I called the Ugh factor and makes me less likely to come back to that beach.
Obviously there are people who will do anything to make a buck, including destroying a vacation spot. It is an interesting example of Garrett Hardin’s Tragedy of the Commons, where everyone crowds the air and water with advertisements — killing the very reason people come to the beach. When you add Ocean City’s lack of city planning and limits on development, the result is a downward spiral — the loss of some great beaches.
Put Bloomberg in charge….. They will be gone……
I agree. They would be wiser to let tourists and locals have some peace away from 24/7, incessant, commercial babble.
see: first world problems
OT: things that tick me off; more from the land of testosterone fueled American exceptionalism — The DRONES and the people who wield them. Or not. Via Americablog
http://www.americablog.com/2012/06/obama-admin-to-us-court-drone-kill.html
Oh, and on topic, when it comes to gaudy and tasteless commercial advertising count me intolerant.
Professor T – Could you pick me up some large fries from Thrasher’s while you’re there? Or maybe a combo platter from Philip’s? Six thirty and I’m craving seafood …
One of those water billboards floated by — it said,
“THE OCEAN — BEAUTY — ALL OF THIS CAN BE DESTROYED — MARYLAND STATE BAR”
Seeing such a spectacle but have surely made you feel as if you were wearing plaid bermudas and black socks even if such horrors never occupied your wardrobe. These billboards beyond visual assault, they leap ingrown toenail first into the realm of mental guerilla warfare.
my response to noxious ads is to not buy the product.
I had never heard of such a thing. Seems if there is beauty somewhere someone will figure out how to make it ugly and make a buck at the same time.
This is also the first time I’ve heard about this desecration through advertising, though I must admit I’m not surprised. Back in the 60′s and 70′s Ocean City was a pleasant beach town, it’s sad to see what the years have wrought. I wouldn’t go to a beach where this is common practice, but I wonder how it has affected Ocean City tourism?
This is one reason why God made rifles. Or was it Dog?
The billboards are there for target practice for Chris sake. Or is it Dog’s sake?
@keestadoll – Quit making fun of my dad!
If one of these shows up at our local beach, it’ll end up sunk… Not saying by me, just that it will be sunk.
This is also the first time I have heard of this kind of advertising. Sad state of affairs. the best way to get rid of them is to get the tourists riled up about them!
BTW, Enjoy the familiy time at the beach Professor!
I haven’t seen those, here on the West Coast. Maybe because our beaches are public property, by definition? I don’t know how beaches are treated, legally, in the East.
Cannot get excited about OC until the sweet corn comes in, but water billboards? ack! so glad my time there had a clear natural view.
(maybe this is an opportunity for Rehoboth or some other beach who will ban these things.)
Mark me down for in the “this is new to me” column and the “how utterly revolting” column as well. If I were at the beach and saw one of these, it would guarantee two things: I would never be back to that beach (and its attendant businesses) and I would never give patronage to any venal half-wit willing to advertise in this manner.
There is a famous US Supreme Court “takings case” about liberty interest, or maybe, interplay between liberty interests and property interests. It was back in the late 80s, early 90s. California I believe. Someone who owned a beachfront house put up a fence to keep people from cutting through; but by law the homeowner only owned something like 100 ft of the beach behind the house and didn’t own the “view” of the ocean. And it came out that he couldn’t put up the fence because it denied people on NON-PRIVATE PROPERTY the right to SEE the ocean. I have no time to look for the case now — it was when I was researching the “life interest” concept and was charting the “liberty interests” and “property interests” and their lifespans, etc.
Somebody help me out with this, I am NAL.
How far off shore are these jackasses?
Eggs are pretty cheap.
to some.
If you live in CA and have a house on the beach, the state owns the part of the beach that extends up to line based on the water level as of a certain date. This ownership is established by a CA statute and title policies will always include an exception for the rights of the state of CA in the beach front property. No matter who you are, you can’t prevent people from walking through the surf in front of your property. This is totally different from the law on the east coast. Not sure if other western states have similar statutes.
Maybe the takings case referred to by Malisha challenged that CA statute as a form of “taking.” Anyway, the statute’s been upheld and may be why you won’t see these abominable floating billboards in CA.
Not having to do with the beach, but I always loved that you cannot put up billboards in the state of Vermont. They have the right idea!
Come on Rafflaw, let’s hear it: “another example of corporate america destroying our way of life.”. Come on! I know it’s coming!!
it’s an outrage. they’re blocking my view of banner planes and the goodyear blimp.
HERE:
How I miss you,
my ancient friends!
Mitt Romney called Professor, He says “why don’t you just pay the ad company more money to not run them, that’s what I do”
Ps. any chance the Purple Moose Saloon is still there? It was on the boardwalk around 6th …..in 1974.
@ David B – Loved that place. Still there – http://www.purplemoose.com/
junctionshamus many thanks, I hitchhiked there twice from western NY. To meet a buddy from grammar school that worked at periscope pictures. Oh my goodness, memories of youthful freedom are powerful. Specially cause I was free from the consequences of ignorance. Also I went there with my future wife, and also when she was my wife. I don’t think I will be going there with her as my ex wife. When I was a child I went there with my family once and just my father once. OH MY, memory overload (in a good way) .. I had a great experience in the ocean at midnight with a young woman I met in the purple moose!! ….. Yes it can be done if one is 22 and fearless…. or as I reflect now … if one is 22 and knows everything. Man! youth is fun.
Is it Wisdom or Rheumatism that that bank the youthful fires, for if I could I may choose to be as stupid as my youth once was….if I could..
I accept that now as a moot question, because the answer is equally moot.
Where the heck is that darn Ponce DeLeon !!!!!!
When we arrived, my youngest, Madie, asked what the “trucks” were doing on the water. She was pointing to huge signs that looked like floating 18-wheeler trucks passing slowly back and forth in front of the beach.
======================================================
Salt water trucker? You have to keep the speed down to 10 miles an hour.
Here in NJ we have a problem that spoils the beauty of our beaches.
It’s called Snooki.