Yea yea yea, I know, broken windows theory bla bla bla, litter, more crime, bla bla bla. I say that with sarcasm because as much as I agree with elements of the Broken Windows Theory I don't like how it's carried into areas where it's not meant to cover.
For example, a lot of people say that if you paint over graffiti right away this discourages vandals from putting up more graffiti. Seriously? Does anyone truly believe that? Graffiti vandals aren't motivated to put up graffiti because the area they live in is run down. They're motivated to put up the graffiti because they seek the fame and notoriety that comes with putting up their moniker. The idea that if you paint over the graffiti quickly that somehow the vandal is going to stop putting up graffiti is wrong.
Yes, the first step in combatting the graffiti problem is to paint over the graffiti immediately, but don't stop there. Don't stop and think that because the graffiti is being painted over quickly that somehow that's going to fix the problem. Don't believe me? Take a look at California. How long has that "abatement only" strategy been implemented? And what has happened to the graffiti problem in the past 15 years? Did it go down? It didn't. It grew out of control. Fortunately, within the past few years cities have looked for a new approach to the problem and we're proud of the great success that they've had. It's great to see cities like Fontana, Escondido, Pico Rivera, Rancho Cucamonga, Ventura, Palmdale and many others have such great success. Any time a city can use a program that reduces their graffiti and pays for itself in restitution recovery you know it's a win win situation. But each of these cities took that critical first step beyond just painting over the graffiti and decided to give law enforcement something they could use to help stem the problem.
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
You Have Got to be Kidding Me!
I'm not one to be voicing my opinion when it comes to politics or elections, especially the upcoming Presidential one but in light of this article, I'll make an exception:
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-et-streetart23-2008aug23,0,4609510.story
In case you don't feel like reading the article let me give the cliff notes version. There's a guy, who does graffiti. In this case he did a large mural of Barack Obama. He was partly inspired to do the mural because of Obama's message and positions. He also says that he drew inspiration from Soviet propaganda posters...well done there. That on it's own is enough to give someone pause, however the real kicker to this is Obama's personal note written to the graffiti vandal:
"The political messages involved in your work encouraged Americans to believe they can help change the status quo. Your images have a profound effect on people, whether seen in a gallery or on a stop sign."
Whether seen in a gallery or on a stop sign. WOW! One more time just so you can be sure you read that right "Whether seen in a gallery or on a stop sign." Signed by the Presidential candidate himself. Are you kidding me? Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the Presidential candidate just endorsed graffiti vandalism.
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-et-streetart23-2008aug23,0,4609510.story
In case you don't feel like reading the article let me give the cliff notes version. There's a guy, who does graffiti. In this case he did a large mural of Barack Obama. He was partly inspired to do the mural because of Obama's message and positions. He also says that he drew inspiration from Soviet propaganda posters...well done there. That on it's own is enough to give someone pause, however the real kicker to this is Obama's personal note written to the graffiti vandal:
"The political messages involved in your work encouraged Americans to believe they can help change the status quo. Your images have a profound effect on people, whether seen in a gallery or on a stop sign."
Whether seen in a gallery or on a stop sign. WOW! One more time just so you can be sure you read that right "Whether seen in a gallery or on a stop sign." Signed by the Presidential candidate himself. Are you kidding me? Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the Presidential candidate just endorsed graffiti vandalism.
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Parents can be so humbling...
As you can see to the right of this post my Twitter information is posted. I know Twitter has gotten a lot of flack lately because of their servers running slow etc but I like them. I like them so much that I decided to tell my parents about them. As in, my 77 and 75 year old parents. The conversation went a little something like this: "So I've gotten into this new things called Twitter." Uncomfortable long pause - "Timmy we don't talk like that and would appreciate you not speaking that kind of filth over the phone to us." With shock and quick relief I realize they think it's some nefarious new activity that their angel son who's never done anything wrong has gotten into. So I respond by saying "No, no, you have it all wrong. Twitter's not like that. It's a following program...where people can follow what your doing and see where you are and stuff." Again, another long pause. "Isn't that stalking? Why do you want to be stalked? Kep, is our son into being stalked now? Son, what happened when you were in California?" Then I realized, what a lost cause this was. Trying to explain Twitter to people who have know contextual understanding of this new technology is, lets say challenging.
Then though I realized, we face the same challenges at Graffiti Tracker. We sometimes make the mistake in assuming that every person we talk to understands the complexities of a graffiti problem. When I first started working in this field I was surprised by how many law enforcement officers knew very little about graffiti and did not know how to read the graffiti. For our analysts it's like being proficient in another language. Many of the cities we get contacted by are just now beginning to have a problem with graffiti and don't have the years of being affected by this problem and so some of the solutions we talk about seem as foreign to them as Twitter did to my parents. The challenge is on us at Graffiti Tracker to be as thorough as possible in explaining graffiti, the solutions that work, and the ones that don't and to be as open to questions as possible. Just don't ask what happened to me in California.
Then though I realized, we face the same challenges at Graffiti Tracker. We sometimes make the mistake in assuming that every person we talk to understands the complexities of a graffiti problem. When I first started working in this field I was surprised by how many law enforcement officers knew very little about graffiti and did not know how to read the graffiti. For our analysts it's like being proficient in another language. Many of the cities we get contacted by are just now beginning to have a problem with graffiti and don't have the years of being affected by this problem and so some of the solutions we talk about seem as foreign to them as Twitter did to my parents. The challenge is on us at Graffiti Tracker to be as thorough as possible in explaining graffiti, the solutions that work, and the ones that don't and to be as open to questions as possible. Just don't ask what happened to me in California.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Why do you love Pico?
I was recently doing a presentation on graffiti. Typically, I talk about different cities that have been successful at reducing graffiti and increasing restitution. Afterwards, I was talking to some folks and I was asked why I speak so much about Pico Rivera. I told the person that I wasn't aware that I did but then when talking to some of my staff they commented that I always talk about Pico and mention them more then other cities. So later I got to thinking and wondering why that was.
They've been a great client to work with but really, all of our clients have been fun and great to work with. So that couldn't be the reason. They've had great success reducing graffiti, but so has Escondido, and Carson and others so that really doesn't put them over the top. And then I started thinking about when they first started. And now I know why I love and talk so highly of Pico Rivera as a client.
When they first signed on, they knew that Graffiti Tracker would be a good product, but they were still new in getting personnel from the law enforcement side involved. Then came the pivotal moment for them. I know this may sound strange, but they asked for help. Investigating graffiti was something totally new to them so the deputies weren't familiar with graffiti. They called and asked for some personalized training in how to read graffiti, understand the subculture better, and investigate graffiti. And the results? Well let's see: 42% reduction in graffiti since September 2006; over $100,000 in restitution ordered by the courts because of prosecutions; over $30,000 collected in restitution (which so far they've paid for our contract just in restitution alone, well done there!); became the leaders in Los Angeles county in filing graffiti cases with the DA's office; and the list could go on and on and on.
So why do I mention all of this? Because sometimes its OK to ask for help. We're getting a lot of inquiries from cities who are just starting to have a graffiti problem. As a result, they're experiencing the same frustrations that many cities in the Los Angeles area already experienced with regards to graffiti solutions. If you're reading this, and you are one of those cities, pick up the phone, give us a call. We absolutely want to help you out and can answer many of your questions and point you in the right direction. I started Graffiti Tracker because I saw the impact we could have on graffiti. There's no doubt you too can be like Pico Rivera and many of our other clients.
They've been a great client to work with but really, all of our clients have been fun and great to work with. So that couldn't be the reason. They've had great success reducing graffiti, but so has Escondido, and Carson and others so that really doesn't put them over the top. And then I started thinking about when they first started. And now I know why I love and talk so highly of Pico Rivera as a client.
When they first signed on, they knew that Graffiti Tracker would be a good product, but they were still new in getting personnel from the law enforcement side involved. Then came the pivotal moment for them. I know this may sound strange, but they asked for help. Investigating graffiti was something totally new to them so the deputies weren't familiar with graffiti. They called and asked for some personalized training in how to read graffiti, understand the subculture better, and investigate graffiti. And the results? Well let's see: 42% reduction in graffiti since September 2006; over $100,000 in restitution ordered by the courts because of prosecutions; over $30,000 collected in restitution (which so far they've paid for our contract just in restitution alone, well done there!); became the leaders in Los Angeles county in filing graffiti cases with the DA's office; and the list could go on and on and on.
So why do I mention all of this? Because sometimes its OK to ask for help. We're getting a lot of inquiries from cities who are just starting to have a graffiti problem. As a result, they're experiencing the same frustrations that many cities in the Los Angeles area already experienced with regards to graffiti solutions. If you're reading this, and you are one of those cities, pick up the phone, give us a call. We absolutely want to help you out and can answer many of your questions and point you in the right direction. I started Graffiti Tracker because I saw the impact we could have on graffiti. There's no doubt you too can be like Pico Rivera and many of our other clients.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Due to rising fuel costs we've been forced to do nothing...
I'm not sure if you're aware but fuel costs have gone up. I say this with much sarcasm because everyday it seems like another story is posted about how rising fuel costs have caused someone to do the unthinkable. Probably my favorite so far is the story on CNN about how the rapid rise in fuel costs have forced people to switch to "push mowers" to save money on gas. I recently told my new wife that we can't have kids for a while because we can't afford the gas to take her to the hospital when she goes into labor. "Sorry babe, rising fuel costs." This is getting ridiculous.
I understand that fuel costs have gone up but what I don't understand is this need by the media to constantly tell us in different creative ways about how fuel prices have risen and how that's impacted us. First it's the how much gas has risen. Then it's how Bob and Betty can't take the kids cross country this Summer so they invent this term "staycation" and cleverly weave it into our daily lexicon. Then it's how police are getting more creative at saving gas by increasing bike patrols and foot patrols. Then to keep the story going they come up with these crazy stories like the one originally mentioned above about how people are using push mowers now instead of gas mowers.
Let me tell you how asinine that is. First, the average person spends about $60 in gas a year on mowing their lawn. A decent push mower will cost you about $120. So in an attempt to save $60 a year on gas you've spent 2 years worth of your lawn mower gas right away. For being that stupid, I hope in two years gas prices drop back down. I have a push mower in my garage because when I first bought my house I figured I'm going to be a man and go old school on my grass. After one time of doing that and my fat ass wheezing away from pushing it up hill that came to a quick halt. Needless to say Forrest Green Lawn Service does good work and apparently when I'm sleeping.
Now, do I think that there's really a trend in America with people switching to push mowers? No. Here's what happened. A national lawn and garden company has a PR firm on retainer and the PR firm, in order to get more press coverage for their large account, pitched a story to the news outlets about how people were switching to push mowers. It was a way for them to capitalize on the hot topic. It's sad and is part of what's degrading journalism today. I see this a lot with stories on graffiti. Statistics being thrown out about how cities have reduced graffiti 90%. Now let's be reasonable. If any city was able to reduce graffiti 90% whoever designed that strategy would be an instant millionaire.
At Graffiti Tracker we're very happy when we see cities reduce graffiti 20 to 30% or can help a city recover 30 or 40 thousand dollars in restitution but a 90% reduction? That's ridiculous. And instead of scrutinizing the facts the paper just printed the story nearly verbatim from the press release. For our company, scrutinize what we say because we don't put out any releases with that kind of nonsense. For us to determine that a city is being successful we look at 3 factors: Have arrests/charges increased? Has the amount of restitution ordered/collected increased enough to cover the cost of our contract? And has the amount of graffiti decreased from the previous year? Now if all of those 3 criteria are met then you'll see us sing the praises of that city and rightfully so because they've definitely done their part in tackling their graffiti problem and the people in those communities need to know that. Anything short of that is not a success in our books and that means we need to work harder - not fluff numbers in hopes that someone doesn't notice.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to look into buying a camel for our field representative, Ricky, to use when meeting and training our clients.
I understand that fuel costs have gone up but what I don't understand is this need by the media to constantly tell us in different creative ways about how fuel prices have risen and how that's impacted us. First it's the how much gas has risen. Then it's how Bob and Betty can't take the kids cross country this Summer so they invent this term "staycation" and cleverly weave it into our daily lexicon. Then it's how police are getting more creative at saving gas by increasing bike patrols and foot patrols. Then to keep the story going they come up with these crazy stories like the one originally mentioned above about how people are using push mowers now instead of gas mowers.
Let me tell you how asinine that is. First, the average person spends about $60 in gas a year on mowing their lawn. A decent push mower will cost you about $120. So in an attempt to save $60 a year on gas you've spent 2 years worth of your lawn mower gas right away. For being that stupid, I hope in two years gas prices drop back down. I have a push mower in my garage because when I first bought my house I figured I'm going to be a man and go old school on my grass. After one time of doing that and my fat ass wheezing away from pushing it up hill that came to a quick halt. Needless to say Forrest Green Lawn Service does good work and apparently when I'm sleeping.
Now, do I think that there's really a trend in America with people switching to push mowers? No. Here's what happened. A national lawn and garden company has a PR firm on retainer and the PR firm, in order to get more press coverage for their large account, pitched a story to the news outlets about how people were switching to push mowers. It was a way for them to capitalize on the hot topic. It's sad and is part of what's degrading journalism today. I see this a lot with stories on graffiti. Statistics being thrown out about how cities have reduced graffiti 90%. Now let's be reasonable. If any city was able to reduce graffiti 90% whoever designed that strategy would be an instant millionaire.
At Graffiti Tracker we're very happy when we see cities reduce graffiti 20 to 30% or can help a city recover 30 or 40 thousand dollars in restitution but a 90% reduction? That's ridiculous. And instead of scrutinizing the facts the paper just printed the story nearly verbatim from the press release. For our company, scrutinize what we say because we don't put out any releases with that kind of nonsense. For us to determine that a city is being successful we look at 3 factors: Have arrests/charges increased? Has the amount of restitution ordered/collected increased enough to cover the cost of our contract? And has the amount of graffiti decreased from the previous year? Now if all of those 3 criteria are met then you'll see us sing the praises of that city and rightfully so because they've definitely done their part in tackling their graffiti problem and the people in those communities need to know that. Anything short of that is not a success in our books and that means we need to work harder - not fluff numbers in hopes that someone doesn't notice.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to look into buying a camel for our field representative, Ricky, to use when meeting and training our clients.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
It's Everywhere: Graffiti or Advertisements
This is slightly off topic but I have to say it. Advertisements are destroying television and the internet as we know it. Online advertisements are totally destroying the news media. Log onto cnn.com and see what I mean. Look at how many videos there are to watch to get the news story. And look at how the headlines are portrayed: "Girl chases thief from lemonade stand" or "Gator snuggles up to SUV tire in Ohio" Now who wouldn't want to find out who the bastard was that stole from some kids lemonade stand or want to see the cute little gator snuggling (gators by the way have the most powerful bite of all things on earth - about 2,100 pounds per square inch, about the same force as a mid size sedan falling on you) but apparently they "snuggle" with tires? Of course you're going to want to read those stories. Sorry, you can't. You have to watch the video. But before you watch the video you have to watch Nortel steal 30 seconds of your life that you'll never get back. This is just one of many ways in which advertisements are destroying the purity of the internet. And finally, I think people are starting to revolt.
Don't believe me? Take a look at satellite radio and it's growth in the past few years. So good that the government decided to try and block that merger, yet Exxon and Mobile were given the green light with barely a look over. HBO has shows that draw ratings comparable to cable channels. Think about it, a pay for service cable company can compete with a "free" service station. Same thing with Showtime, although until recently they really didn't churn out the shows like HBO had in the previous 10 years.
So what can you attribute this too? Is it because regular cable has less quality shows? Doubtful (The Shield, Nip/Tuck, Rescue Me, Friday Night Lights, etc). Two words DVR and Tivo. And why do you think it is that so many people now are switching to using a DVR or Tivo? Because the advertisements are simply destroying everything enjoyable that the world of creativity has to offer. Ok maybe not everything but you get my point. People are fed up with seeing the same boring commercials play out over and over in the most mundane way. So now they wait 20 minutes before sitting down and watching their favorite shows, thus eliminating the commercials. Still don't believe me? When was the last time someone watched the Super Bowl and skipped through the commercials? Why would you? They're entertaining, funny, and worth talking about. By the way, news flash, there are other commercials out there that become cultural reference points for us that don't have to play during major sporting events (Mac guy vs PC guy; Burger King eat like a snake). Commercials of some CEO in a suit walking down a back alley talking about how he's changing a cell phone company that's lost damn near all it's customers isn't going to cut it. Nor is the commercial from a credit card company showing two evil looking characters making a credit card which really looks like an evil credit card company making an evil credit card - good thinking Capital One. You're definitely not in my wallet since you dumped David Spade.
So what does this all have to do with graffiti? The same as what I mentioned in my previous blog. For those graffiti artists out there that actually have talent and skill, it would benefit you to get the graffiti vandals to stop destroying peoples property. Until then, your work will be just like the commercials that get skipped over by consumers because they're all lumped into the same category as boring or worse - annoying. Until graffiti vandalism is reduced to near zero graffiti artists will never gain the legitimacy that they're seeking.
Don't believe me? Take a look at satellite radio and it's growth in the past few years. So good that the government decided to try and block that merger, yet Exxon and Mobile were given the green light with barely a look over. HBO has shows that draw ratings comparable to cable channels. Think about it, a pay for service cable company can compete with a "free" service station. Same thing with Showtime, although until recently they really didn't churn out the shows like HBO had in the previous 10 years.
So what can you attribute this too? Is it because regular cable has less quality shows? Doubtful (The Shield, Nip/Tuck, Rescue Me, Friday Night Lights, etc). Two words DVR and Tivo. And why do you think it is that so many people now are switching to using a DVR or Tivo? Because the advertisements are simply destroying everything enjoyable that the world of creativity has to offer. Ok maybe not everything but you get my point. People are fed up with seeing the same boring commercials play out over and over in the most mundane way. So now they wait 20 minutes before sitting down and watching their favorite shows, thus eliminating the commercials. Still don't believe me? When was the last time someone watched the Super Bowl and skipped through the commercials? Why would you? They're entertaining, funny, and worth talking about. By the way, news flash, there are other commercials out there that become cultural reference points for us that don't have to play during major sporting events (Mac guy vs PC guy; Burger King eat like a snake). Commercials of some CEO in a suit walking down a back alley talking about how he's changing a cell phone company that's lost damn near all it's customers isn't going to cut it. Nor is the commercial from a credit card company showing two evil looking characters making a credit card which really looks like an evil credit card company making an evil credit card - good thinking Capital One. You're definitely not in my wallet since you dumped David Spade.
So what does this all have to do with graffiti? The same as what I mentioned in my previous blog. For those graffiti artists out there that actually have talent and skill, it would benefit you to get the graffiti vandals to stop destroying peoples property. Until then, your work will be just like the commercials that get skipped over by consumers because they're all lumped into the same category as boring or worse - annoying. Until graffiti vandalism is reduced to near zero graffiti artists will never gain the legitimacy that they're seeking.
Saturday, April 12, 2008
Message to Taggers
It's no secret that those that do graffiti vandalism hate my guts. Most think that as a company Graffiti Tracker is out to some how silence the voices of inner city America. That couldn't be further from the truth. Anytime anyone wants to debate me about graffiti I'm more than willing to participate in an open, honest and adult discussion.
That all being said, I have a message for those who participate in doing Graffiti Art: Get those doing graffiti vandalism to stop. They are destroying what you're working for. Your goal with graffiti art is to get these masterpieces that you've perfected visible to a mass audience. Graffiti vandals are making it impossible for you to achieve this. How? Because most graffiti, nearly 99% of graffiti that cities are spending millions to abate is either in the form of graffiti vandalism or gang graffiti. Don't believe me? Take a drive up the 405 Freeway in Los Angeles near LAX. Look at the graffiti that is on the sound walls.
For those of you who have skills and can legitimately call your work "art" you should be outraged that someone would try to pass off their cursive written name on a wall as "art." You should be telling the kids in the communities that what they're doing is not "art" and because they keep doing that they are causing the graffiti artists to get a bad wrap. It is in your best interest to make clear distinctions between graffiti artists and graffiti vandals. People like Mark Echo, who are so quick to take city governments to court should be just as vocal condemning the actions of those who put up graffiti vandalism on people's property.
Anyone can write their name on a wall. Anyone can write their name in cursive. Simply writing "smokes" on a wall is not "art." I think that for most people if they had to drive the freeways and see these large elaborate murals that the Graffiti Artists had permission to write, then they'd be more sympathetic to your cause. But writing "smokes" or "risk" or some other adopted moniker is not "art" by any stretch of the imagination. If you're a true Graffiti Artist, it would help your cause greatly if graffiti vandalism was eliminated. Only then could you legitimize and distinguish yourselves from graffiti vandals and then start seeking out permission from the appropriate agencies to get your work displayed in the right venue.
That all being said, I have a message for those who participate in doing Graffiti Art: Get those doing graffiti vandalism to stop. They are destroying what you're working for. Your goal with graffiti art is to get these masterpieces that you've perfected visible to a mass audience. Graffiti vandals are making it impossible for you to achieve this. How? Because most graffiti, nearly 99% of graffiti that cities are spending millions to abate is either in the form of graffiti vandalism or gang graffiti. Don't believe me? Take a drive up the 405 Freeway in Los Angeles near LAX. Look at the graffiti that is on the sound walls.
For those of you who have skills and can legitimately call your work "art" you should be outraged that someone would try to pass off their cursive written name on a wall as "art." You should be telling the kids in the communities that what they're doing is not "art" and because they keep doing that they are causing the graffiti artists to get a bad wrap. It is in your best interest to make clear distinctions between graffiti artists and graffiti vandals. People like Mark Echo, who are so quick to take city governments to court should be just as vocal condemning the actions of those who put up graffiti vandalism on people's property.
Anyone can write their name on a wall. Anyone can write their name in cursive. Simply writing "smokes" on a wall is not "art." I think that for most people if they had to drive the freeways and see these large elaborate murals that the Graffiti Artists had permission to write, then they'd be more sympathetic to your cause. But writing "smokes" or "risk" or some other adopted moniker is not "art" by any stretch of the imagination. If you're a true Graffiti Artist, it would help your cause greatly if graffiti vandalism was eliminated. Only then could you legitimize and distinguish yourselves from graffiti vandals and then start seeking out permission from the appropriate agencies to get your work displayed in the right venue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
