The Globe and Mail reports this morning on a controversy developing over some Toronto tourism ads. The creative work for the print media campaign was donated by a public spirited agency (who no doubt hoped to benefit from the publicity) with Americans in border states the target market; i.e. people who know a bit about Canada but could use some reminders of what the city has to offer.
The Globe picked up the story when a city councillor complained that the ads do not convey the right message and image of Toronto – in the councillor’s opinion. Of course the councillor had no information about the effectiveness of the ads, audience response or anything of the like – but he doesn't like them.
For me the real story here is the age-old proclivity of Toronto city councillors to stick their noses into operational issues, whether or not they have any expertise or knowledge to inform their opinions. The role of council is to establish the level of priority it wants to give tourism, set a budget for promotion and determine what organization (the city alone or a partnership of the city and private business) should undertake the job. It’s not council’s role to micro-manage the campaign and second-guess the professionals who implement it. This is how projects get driven off course and result in failure.
It’s not dissimilar to the interference of councillors in deciding which streets, water mains, etc. get repaired/replaced/upgraded when that task should be left to the professionals in the responsible civic departments. One of the results is excellent services in high income, high voter participation communities while the pipes are bursting and roads crumbling in other areas. What follows are expensive emergency repairs that ultimately deplete the budget and lead to councillors and mayors saying the city is underfunded. It’s a simplification, but the real problem is that the city is mismanaged by councillors who are blind to their own competence and appropriate role.
The story I would like to have seen the Globe print would have been one that a councillor’s interference is threatening another initiative (and snubbing the hard work donated by a team of volunteers) to promote Toronto tourism. The Globe missed the real issue.
The Globe picked up the story when a city councillor complained that the ads do not convey the right message and image of Toronto – in the councillor’s opinion. Of course the councillor had no information about the effectiveness of the ads, audience response or anything of the like – but he doesn't like them.
For me the real story here is the age-old proclivity of Toronto city councillors to stick their noses into operational issues, whether or not they have any expertise or knowledge to inform their opinions. The role of council is to establish the level of priority it wants to give tourism, set a budget for promotion and determine what organization (the city alone or a partnership of the city and private business) should undertake the job. It’s not council’s role to micro-manage the campaign and second-guess the professionals who implement it. This is how projects get driven off course and result in failure.
It’s not dissimilar to the interference of councillors in deciding which streets, water mains, etc. get repaired/replaced/upgraded when that task should be left to the professionals in the responsible civic departments. One of the results is excellent services in high income, high voter participation communities while the pipes are bursting and roads crumbling in other areas. What follows are expensive emergency repairs that ultimately deplete the budget and lead to councillors and mayors saying the city is underfunded. It’s a simplification, but the real problem is that the city is mismanaged by councillors who are blind to their own competence and appropriate role.
The story I would like to have seen the Globe print would have been one that a councillor’s interference is threatening another initiative (and snubbing the hard work donated by a team of volunteers) to promote Toronto tourism. The Globe missed the real issue.
