Politics and infrastructure are bound to collide in innumerable ways. On a metaphysical level, the two have nothing in common — one is a body of ideas resting on a set of subjective principles, the other is, well, a set of roads, bridges, buildings, etc. But the two nonetheless can’t really exist in modern society without finding themselves intertwined. And nowhere are these messy collisions more apparent than in cases where religious groups take out ads on public transit. [SButtonZ button="digg"]
In the latest case in New York City, the religious group is Muslims for Peace and the medium for the ad is 90 public buses. The ad, which will appear through the end of this week reads “Love for all. Hatred for none. 1-800-WHY-ISLAM” — not exactly the most inflammatory statement, but nonetheless enough to offend.
The ads will run on buses in Queens, Manhattan and the Bronx, and have ruffled plenty of feathers. The MTA has heard plenty of complaints, including demands that religious advertising be banned from public transit (though given the state of the MTA’s budget, it’s not likely that they’re going to turn down ad dollars anytime soon). To thicken the plot, these billboards come on the heels of another religion-tinged ad campaign that read: “Fatwa on your head? Leaving Islam? RefugefromIslam.com.”
This isn’t the first time that religious ads on the MTA, which allows any ad that isn’t offensive or that doesn’t promote an illegal activity, have caused a kerfuffle — in 2006, a set of “Jesus for Jews” posters in the Times Square subway caused uproar, and in 2009 the atheist group the Big Apple Coalition of Reason raised eyebrows with an ad reading, “A million New Yorkers are good without God. Are you?”
Sure, in a perfect world public transit would be just that — public, and not endorsing any religious or doctrinal viewpoint that might alienate one or many of its riders. But the economic realities are such that if a religious group wants to shovel out the cash for a dogmatic ad, transit agencies shouldn’t be obligated to turn them down. Now, if the federal government wants to seriously up its funding for public transportation, then maybe the situation would be different.
Tags: church v. state, Islam, religion
i am not muslim but i dont find the ads the least bit offensive. in fact, it makes me happy as it reminds me that there are others (of different faiths) who are working toward the same goal of a peaceful world. plus, the mta needs money so badly. who really is against peace anyway? im more offended that people would get offended!
I respect any organization’s right to advertise and spread its message. The MTA is not endorsing religion here. They are taking in ad revenue. Anyone has a right to post their beliefs on an advertisement. If a Catholic, or an Atheist can post their own ads up on the same buses, then the system is fair.
On a side note, I am not a Muslim, but I am for this ad campaign because hopefully it will spread some kind of message that not all Muslims are terrorists. Very, very, few of them are. Do not group people or stereotype their religion based on the actions of the few. We have enough hate in this world, thank you very much.
“Sure, in a perfect world public transit would be just that — public, and not endorsing any religious or doctrinal viewpoint that might alienate one or many of its riders.”
I dont see hosting an advertisement as an endorsement for the particular product. If that was the case, public transit authorities would have a very, VERY short list of available advertisers.
For example, couldn’t one claim that a coke ad is endorsing a specific beverage and might alienate one or many pepsi drinkers? Or that advertising soft drinks at all encourages consumption of sugary beverages that provide no health benefits and increase obesity, diabetes etc and that as a tax funded agency, the MTA should do everything it can to promote public health?
No, the MTA policy is the right one. Allow everything except hate speech or messages that encourage violence or to commit crimes. I think most people understand that selling ad space does not equal endorsement of the advertised message.
I am generally pretty OK with religions buying advertising on public transit. It is all part of having free speech. As a public agency, transit operators can’t really pick and choose which points of view to allow or ban, so they really have to take it all within some general standards. This allows for political ads, Gay Pride posters, religious and non-religious groups, reproductive health providers etc. Sometime some people will not be comfortable with the message, but that’s life in the big free city.
But religious ads are NOT an endorsement on the part of the agency any more than any other ad is an endorsement. I think there should be some standards though. Religious and atheist ads should not suggest that those with other beilifs are fools or going to burn in hell for instance. Instead they should be about that beilef system’s unique, positive point of view, or to highlight the commonalities of their members with the rest of humanity (as in the Muslim desire for peace or atheists’ goodness).
As a bus rider I have no problem with ads for Christianity, Islam or any other religious ads.
I mean, when you had Spanish explorers arriving at a Native American settlement and giving everyone five minutes to drop to their knees and worship Jesus Christ before slaughtering anyone who didn’t comply, I can’t exactly harbor fond feelings for Christianity as a religion of peace either.
[...] At the Awkward Intersection of Transit and Religion (Infrastructurist) [...]
who would possibly be offended??
Regardless of current budget problems, would’t it make sense to just eliminate advertising on public transit?
Funding for transit comes almost entirely from the public, in the form of taxes and fares, while advertising contributes a minuscule fraction — less than 1% in most cases. Transit agencies get next to nothing for subjecting their passengers to intrusive and potentially controversial ads, so why not just get rid of the ads altogether and keep public transportation public?
I drive a bus in a Large California county. Please just read the ads on our buses as what they are: A message from a group of people who paid for our buses to deliver the message. If you don’t like the message, turn away. If you like the message, buy the soda ,film, light bulb…Whatever.
I screamed my lungs out over only one ad glued on my bus in 20 years of driving these moving billboards. The ad was for a ‘skater shoe’ . The cutsey name of the shoe was “Tagger”. This was displayed on our bus sides while my company was spending thousands of dollars every month to remove graffitti from the surfaces of our buses. It was a cute ad and shoe but LOUSY name. Some adman needed to get spanked for that one.
Most people fail to see the big picture and fail to understand the issues.
This ad is in respondents to the previous ad concerning those intended on leaving Islam, which the Muslims complained about. A baseless complaint which no one challenged.
I find it typical of those in Islam to mislead all who are outside of islam.
Islam must be constantly and relentlessly questioned and challenged until the entire see the truth of this so called religion of peace.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
[...] http://www.infrastructurist.com/2010/07/20/when-transportation-and-religion-collide-muslim-ads-on-th... [...]
Why don’t you put some Christian signs on the public buses? Oh I forgot the Muslim faith is politically correct now. The liberals would have a fit if a Christian sign was put on a Bus!
There are tons of Christian and essentially Christian (ads about “faith,” for example, which is not the key category in many religions) ads in and outside transit vehicles. The people who get slammed by political correctness–Christian political correctness–are atheists–there’s a howl every time we exercise our ability to post an ad on a bus.
As to whether the Muslims for Peace ads are true, since when were ads vetted for truth. Unless there’s a demonstrable lie (e..g cheesecake is lowfat) ads go merrily forth, whether they’re on the side of a bus or somewhere else.
I don’t live in New York anymore, and it would be bad anywhere, but I always find it particularly sad when controversies like this erupt in what I think of as one of the world’s most cosmoppolitan cities. Sad.
And, oh, “conservatives.” Whatever happened to your faith in the “free market of ideas.” Sounds like a lot of you are closer to Taliban than Milton Friedman.
My perfect world would not be the absence of any transcendent messages in public. That’s sterile and even a little creepy, given the fact that humans are the ones using these places. It would be the presence of a full diversity of transcendent messages – even if they don’t all fit nicely together. Some of us are offended too easily.
I don’t have a big problem with religious ads on buses. The ones that bother me are ones that transit-bash. Usually car ads (“Get off this bus and buy a car at Joe’s Used Car lot!!”) although I remember a broadband internet ad along the lines of “Internet that’s faster than this bus!”
Islam and peace are incompatible, so this would violate some kind of truth in advertising laws, wouldn’t it?