I came across a great video today that illustrates Los Angeles’ new approach to advertising their public transit system (h/t CoolTown Studios). They’ve created their own in-house creative ad agency whose mission is to update typically stodgy transit advertising and create a message that appeals to more image conscious discretionary riders. Since this style of advertising went into effect a couple years ago, they have seen the number of discretionary riders rise 14%, from 22% to 36%. The video is definitely worth a watch, as it profiles some pretty clever ideas.
I’m far from an expert on public transit, but as I see it ridership can generally be broken down into two categories: those that are transit dependent due to age, disability, or not owning a vehicle; and discretionary riders, who could choose to drive if they wanted but instead take transit due to some sort of preference (more convenient, cheaper, less stressful, hate global warming). I think a transit agency’s first obligation is to the transit dependent population, because without public transportation these people have no other reliable way to get to work, school, the grocery store or any other place we need to go to. Sadly, this is especially important because of the way we’ve constructed our cities over the last 60 years or so. Our destinations are so scattered and our roads so hostile to cyclists and pedestrians that transit is a necessity for many.
That being said, for public transit to truly shape a city’s built environment and how it’s residents get around, it must also be successful at attracting those riders who could otherwise drive their car. Obviously, a big part of this is providing a quality service that goes where people want to go and does so on a regular and reliable basis. However, even a good transit service still has to overcome the stigma that some people have about taking transit, namely that it’s dirty and unsafe. Tackling obstacles like these is why LA’s ad campaign is so brilliant. They use creative thinking and design (unusual for a transit agency) to point out how easy and convenient transit is, even to a person who can afford to drive.
Another reason that it is important for transit agencies to reach out to discretionary users is the potential health benefits that using transit can provide. As my Studio I professor, Gideon Berger, has said countless times, every transit user is also a pedestrian at some point. To get to and from the beginning and end of their transit trip, some amount of walking is involved, more walking than they’d likely get if they drove a car. Granted it’s not much physical activity, but in a nation as sedentary as America, any extra activity that can be worked into the daily routine is crucial.
Unfortunately, it’s not real easy to start a new advertising campaign right now. Transit agencies across country, who don’t often have a lot of money even in good times, are facing enormous deficits that are causing service cutbacks and reducing the quality of service. When there isn’t enough money to go around, it’s hard to argue that more should go towards advertising and brand building instead of bus drivers facing layoffs. This dramatic shortage of funding won’t last forever, though, and when funding does recover transit agencies need to position themselves to create a better brand around the product they’re offering.
In the meantime, kudos to LA. for showing that even an auto-centric city can make transit hip.
It’s all about shifting mindsets. People already believe it’s a good idea to conserve energy and reduce pollution (for the most part). Now they just need to feel good about taking public transit. Make it cool.
But first and foremost, the transit agency needs to be responsive to its consumers. It needs to take them where they need to go, when they need to be there.
Couple a good transit agency with a good branding campaign and I think other towns could see results like LA has seen. But a branding campaign by a transit agency nobody wants to use is a waste of money.
By: Gary on January 22, 2010
at 7:05 am
Another reason that it is so important to raise discretionary ridership is that transit cannot survive on dependent riders alone. There is just not enough dependent riders to support a robust transit system that gets workers to their jobs in an efficient manner. In order to provide the public service to those you need it, overall ridership must increase. As ridership increases, service is able to increase. The more service provided, the more marketable the transit system in a continuous positive feedback loop.
However, when Denver’s RTD saw increased ridership in 2008 due to rising gas prices, they had to actually cut service. The majority of RTD’s funding comes from the sale’s tax. So when consumer spending went down in the end of 2008 so too did RTD’s funding right at the time riders needed them the most. I have little hope for the future of RTD and FasTracks if we keep pegging their funding to sale’s tax instead to the service it is able to provide to its riders.
By: adam on January 31, 2010
at 6:06 pm
[...] two types of riders — dependent, people for whom public transit is their only real option, and discretionary, folks who choose public transit over other modes only if it’s markedly cleaner, safer, more [...]
By: Free mobility, social mobility…transmobility (part III) « Adam Greenfield’s Speedbird on May 5, 2010
at 2:28 pm