Setting the record straight on Milan

Home to iconic brands such as Alfa Romeo, Ferrari, Maserati and Lamborghini — plus Fiat, the company that put the country on wheels, Italy has a deep love affair with cars.

The Autostrada dei Laghi, built in 1924 to connect the city of Milan with Como, Varese and Lake Maggiore, was either the first or one of the very first motorways in the world.

Milan

Milan is home to 1.4 million people and 700,000 cars — considerably more, per capita, than in Amsterdam, Barcelona, Berlin, Copenhagen, London, Paris or Stockholm.

Parking space is insufficient. The guesstimate is that there may be as many as 100,000 illegaly parked cars in the city, for example on sidewalks. It’s rather ugly — Google it!

Milan suffers from serious air pollution problems. Roberto Formigoni, the conservative governor of Lombardy from 1995 to 2013, believed there was nothing to worry about. From 2002 and for a decade, he said the solution would be hydrogen-powered cars.

Progressives to the rescue

Progressives have been ruling Milan since 2011. During Giuliano Pisapia‘s tenure, they oddly decided that the solution to the city’s problems of too many cars, heavy traffic, pollution and the occupation and destruction of public space was to be found in the latest technological miracle solution that comes with a shiny app, car sharing.

Milan currently sports 4 large car-sharing schemes: Mercedes-Benz-owned Car2go and BMW-owned DriveNow, which are now being rolled into ShareNow; and two local players: Enjoy, owned by Eni, Italy’s private-public petrol company and the largest company in the country, and startup Sharengo, the only one of the four that runs electric vehicles.

Incredible as it may seem, towards the end of Giuliano Pisapia’s tenure, the city of Milan de facto legalised illegal parking by drawing parking lines on sidewalks. Unsurprisingly, in 2016 the number of cars in Milan increased for the first time in 15 years.

Here comes Giuseppe Sala

In 2016 Giuseppe Sala, formerly general manager of the city of Milan under conservative mayor Letizia Moratti in 2009-2011, ran for mayor — this time as a progressive, and won. Sala ran on a platform of 32 points, the last one being the promise of A Pet-friendly City. The very first point of his programme, page 25, was A Great Plan for Sustainable Mobility.

Instead of promising to build a certain number of kms of bike lanes like his predecessors, Sala assured the milanese that daily movements by bicycle would jump from 6% to 20%. People in charge of transportation at City Hall immediately told him it was impossible, but he didn’t care. It sounded like a good promise to make, and that was all that mattered.

Four years into his tenure, how are we doing? See page 4: Apparently, not very well.

Milan in the times of Covid-19

Milan’s region, Lombardy, has been the worst-hit in Europe. Schools were shut down on February 23 in six regions in Northern Italy, including Lombardy and the city of Milan. A total lockdown was imposed on Milan by the national government starting March 8. Did City Hall work on pop-up bicycle lanes in the meantime? Of course not.

But when they saw that cities like Bogotà, Berlin and Oakland were being praised for their efforts to put more people on bicycles, they decided to jump on the bandwagon. The city government created a new plan called Strade Aperte, or Open Streets; they promised to create 35 kms 22.7 kms of unprotected bike lanes, and put their spin doctors to work.

How does a pandemic spread? What about false or vastly exaggerated news?

The Guardian took the bait and broke the news, followed by The Irish Times and The Independent. The story was too good to pass. Or to check. Greta and Janette Sadik-Khan retweeted The Guardian and the story crossed the Atlantic: CityLab, The Atlantic, and Fast Company mistook Milan for the new Amsterdam. Last came the BBC, on April 30.

Enter Gisela from Mexico City

Gisela Méndez, an architect and urbanist from Mexico City, was unimpressed.

She discovered that in February 2019 mobility manager Marco Granelli had promised 85 kms of new bike lanes within 2 years, and that well into 2020 he had nothing to show for it. Disappointed, she published a post aptly titled El día que Milán engañó a todo el activismo ciclista mundial, or The day that Milan misled the whole world’s cycling activists.

Milan’s sustainable urban mobility plan, approved in late 2018, called for a revolution: a whole network of new bikes lanes, in colours light blue, red and purple.

Compare it to what we are getting — and hold the prosecco for another day!

The future is cars, cars and yet more cars!

On April 22, the day after the article from The Guardian, the city of Milan put its congestion charge on hold. The same applies to the (formerly) restricted driving zones (ZTL).

While mayor Anne Hidalgo said that she would not let cars invade Paris after the lockdown, Milan’s mayor Giuseppe Sala confirmed the suspension of the congestion charge and said that he is waiting for the next technological miracle, electric cars.

Hydrogen-powered cars, car sharing, electric cars. Cars, cars and yet more cars!

I’m sorry you were tricked, but we’d love to welcome you to Milan! Come for fashion and shopping, for design and food, for Inter and Milan, for art, more art and for the opera.

If you like cars, come for Alfa Romeo. If you like bicycles, head to Amsterdam.


Image Credits:

Autostrada dei Laghi

Cityscape with smog

Enjoy and Car2go

Cycling modal share

Greta retweets

2018 vs. 2020

On top of the Duomo


Pop-up Ads and Banner Ads

About twenty years ago, pop-up ads were all the rage.

Banner ads had failed to deliver clicks. The very first banner ad, placed on HotWired, Wired’s first web magazine, had a staggering click-through rate of 44%.

Everybody was absolutely sure that they had found the right formula. For reasons nobody cared to explain, consumers apparently loved to interact with online ads.

That’s why they had gone online in the first place, wasn’t it? They bought new computers, clunky modems and paid an internet subscription to… see more ads.

It was off to the races. Just about everybody and your uncle crafted business plans centred around showing more banner ads to consumers, also called eyeballs.

As it turned out, the first AT&T banner ad on HotWired was a fluke. People had not changed, like they rarely do. They were clicking just out of mere curiosity.

Pop-up Ads

As curiosity died out, click-through rates plummeted. For a brief season, pop-up ads seemed to be the solution. Click rates were high and everybody got excited.

And why not? Those things were a thing of beauty, weren’t they? ;-)

Once the eyeballs stopped clicking came new ideas, like pop-under ads, fake “close” boxes, or ads that moved around the screen and would not let your mouse close them…

Then came Google

Opera, a small niche browser from Norway, started adding tools to block pop-up ads. But Microsoft’s then dominant Internet Explorer browser would have none of it.

Google had just launched Adwords, their textual ads placed above search engine results. Pop-up ads were in the same market: ugly, no doubt, but they delivered clicks.

In a brilliant move, Google created Google Toolbar, an add-on to IE that blocked pop-up ads. This allowed them to kill off the competition coming from pop-up ads, play nice guy towards users who were sick of the constant interruptions, place their logo in front of millions of users and softly push them to use their search engine more often.

How is this relevant today?

Today, reputable news outlets are seeing marketing budgets move towards small websites that produce questionable content — most of it bullshit — because a set of ad-tech technologies known as programmatic advertising are allowing marketers to target users that read serious newspapers on those websites, at much cheaper prices.

It’s almost 2020, and it’s high time for newspapers to pull a trick like Google did.

[ to be continued… ]

Intent, Context and Identity

I found this interesting article by Don Marti about privacy and what would happen to marketing budgets the day users’ privacy were respected at long last.

I like how Don classifies ads in three groups: ads against search results, based on intent; contextual ads based on content, which can be thought of as similar to ads on magazines; and ads based on identity, on who the user is. These ads are bought wherever it is cheaper to buy them, and they are indeed very similar to direct mail spam.

All fine, except that there’s a missing variable: the format of the ads.

Ads on search engines are textual. They were presented as a form of direct marketing based on intent from the very start, as the yellow pages of the Internet, if you wish, and they perform very well for both those who sell them and those who buy them.

Banners

Banner ads, on the other hand, have been a mess for a quarter of a century.

They were never presented as the new form of magazines ads, and for good reason. The format is small and terrible, and it is very hard to use banner ads to get a message through. To make things worse, creativity has always been an afterthought at best.

Click rates were very high on the very first banner ads, starting with the one that appeared on Wired in 1994. This led to the very wrong idea that Internet users were so interested in companies and their offers that they would want to interact with these ads.

Hence, the IAB.

No, not the Internet Advertising Bureau, but the Interactive Advertising Bureau.

Too bad that today that interaction can be measured in little more than a click every thousand impressions, or about 1/50th of what the click rate for search engine ads is.

Ad-tech

Banner ads are the biggest failure of the Internet, ever. This is why ad-tech companies have been able to sneak in and track our every move to try to sell a terrible format.

Privacy-enabling tools are a great step forward to limit the data collection abuse and the flight of marketing budgets from legitimate websites to nobody knows where.

But I doubt we will be able to win this battle unless we undo the mistake that opened the way for ad-tech companies. The banner ad format is a failure and it must go.

Targeting and Food Labels

Now, what in the world do targeting and food labels have in common?

They both lie.

Have you ever met someone who managed to get healthy thanks to food labels?

The kind of people who count their calories and take notes about what they eat.

Often the same people who eat fatless cheese and drink diet soda.

Neither have I.

Somehow, it doesn’t work for them. It doesn’t work for anybody.

Because, very simply, that’s not the way it works.

It’s either simpler than that, or a lot more complicated.

So complicated, in fact, that the only way to crack it is to keep it simple.

Instead of counting calories, just stop eating fried, salty or sugary processed shit.

And drink nothing but water.

Then it’s likely that not getting some exercise will feel worse than working out.

Not the other way around.

No matter what Michelle Obama or the Coca-Cola Company tell you, if you eat — and drink — garbage food, there’s simply no way you can burn off all that shit by working out.

You’re welcome.

A cover-up

The labels are merely a cover-up.

You know what you’re eating, so if you over eat, it’s your fault.

No, it’s not.

The labels give you information, but not the information that matters.

Why should an average Joe be able to read them and make a sound choice?

Those who are to blame are those who produce, market and push garbage food.

And those in government who allow this scam to go on.

Say, have you ever seen a food label on an apple?

Have you ever met someone who got obese by over-eating salad?

Fine, Doctor

Fine, Doctor, but what the hell does this have to do with advertising?

Say you need to sell the worst advertising format ever, the banner ad.

And people in charge of buying this shit don’t have a fucking clue.

It’s a marriage made in heaven, isn’t it?

You misdirect their attention towards what doesn’t matter and you win.

Hey, look at the food label!

No fat in there.

What could go wrong if I ate a whole bag of cookies?

The more ignorant or desperate people are, the easier it is to screw them.

And few people in the world are as clueless as the average marketing manager.

The format sucks? Nobody ever pays any attention?

One person in five is trying to block these ads altogether?

There’s not one single banner ad that was a smash in 25 years?

Worry not.

Look at the food label.

I mean, at how precisely (or not) we can target consumers for you.

And you’re fucked.