The city of Ottawa has pulled jaywalking advertisements from its test ads for an upcoming road safety campaign this fall, after councillors and the public criticized the graphic nature of the ad and its messaging.

One of the ads featured an image of a bloodied pedestrian lying on the ground, with the caption, “You jaywalked to save time. But you lost it. Forever. Cross only where it is safe.”

Several councillors called on the city of Ottawa to remove the ad immediately, with Coun. Sean Devine expressing concern with “the ad and the messaging it conveys.”

Coun. Ariel Troster also asked staff to pull “this terrible ad” immediately.

“Road violence is caused by driver negligence or bad street design. Blaming pedestrians for crossing the street wrong is offensive,” Troster said on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter."

  • BedSharkPalOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Not sure the “jaywalking terminology” was the actual issue, but it’s the right decision either way!

    • FiveMacs
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Is it though…

      People need to see the effects of dumb decisions. I see nothing wrong with reality. Hiding reality to make people feel happy or whatever doesn’t make them think twice about walking in front of cars, seeing a dead body will. Again, reality.

  • PerogiBoi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Typical City of Ottawa shit. It doesn’t matter if you start with good messaging, a senior manager with absolutely nothing to do with the research or education in communication will come in and decide things have to go entirely their direction.

    Oppose it and they’ll give you a stern talking to about “staying in your lane”.

    • Rodeo
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      So then you clap right back and tell them as “leadership” it is their responsibility to make good informed decisions to the benefit of the people, and if they don’t take the advice of the expert they are failing at their duties.

      People need to buck up and start pointing their fingers at their bosses. Until every public sector employee is clapping back, these assholes are going to keep getting away with it.

      • PerogiBoi
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You are explicitly not allowed to do what you are suggesting. It’s a fireable offence and if you somehow are not fired, it’s considered a career-limiting move.

        It is explained as your job is to provide advice but then implement whatever is told of you.

        For this reason there will never be a mass clap-back of employees.

        • Rodeo
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m not suggesting to refuse to do any tasks. Telling your boss they are not meeting the expectations of their position IS advice. They don’t have to follow it.

          Specifically what offence do you perceive here that is fireable?

          • PerogiBoi
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Go ahead and try exactly what you are suggesting in a gov job and see how far and how long you last. Bonne chance.

  • TheTactfulSaboteur
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    How about the police, who work for the city, start actually enforcing the highway traffic act? Maybe start with that which generates revenue for the city before wasting our money on ads that blame the victims.

  • Killer57
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It’s the graphic ads that work, they stick with you and make you remember them. This was an awful decision by someone too easily offended.

    • frostbiker
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s the graphic ads that work, they stick with you and make you remember them.

      Then show how bad the driver feels after killing a pedestrian, instead of blaming the pedestrian for having been killed.

      • mack7400
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        “You sped to save time. Instead, you destroyed someone else’s.”

        Much better.

      • Mongostein
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        How about both? Road safety is up to all of us.

    • Smk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      IMO, driver need to be careful. Pedestrian should always be prioritized. This ads is meant to say that if you cross anywhere, cars will kill. This almost feel like it’s legitimizing cars for running over pedestrians. I know that’s not what they wanted but that’s how it feels. IMO, pedestrian should be allowed to cross the street whenever they want.