THE BILLBOARD BATTLE

(2 of 2)

The best argument against billboards is that the U.S. public itself apparently does not want them along the new super-roads. When the Automobile Club of Maryland quizzed 9,869 Maryland motorists on whether they favored billboard control within 1,000 ft. of present and future highways, 9,408 said they did, only 461 said they did not. Another check, by Trendex News Poll, reported that 65.9% of those interviewed on a nationwide basis favored billboard control, while only 25.9% were against it. In 1946 a New York State study of some 14,000 roadside signs revealed that many had confusing red or green reflectors flashing traffic terms such as "stop," "turn," "slow," "caution." Another study, in Minnesota in 1952, says A.A.A. Highway Committee Secretary Burton Marsh, also showed that an increase in the number of highway signs was "accompanied by an increase in fatal traffic accidents."

Most Washington experts give a billboard ban only a 50-50 chance of passing. But even if the admen escape federal control, billboards may well be controlled by a group with whom there is no arguing—U.S. businessmen who advertise. After listening to the rising chorus of complaints, California's Union Oil Co. decided last December to cancel its entire $1,000,000 outdoor-advertising program. Said President Reese Taylor: "It doesn't make good sense [to] use an advertising method which was apparently becoming offensive to many of our customers and prospects, and which, in the opinion of some experts, represented a hazard to them."