Pages
Categories
Archives
- December 2016
- May 2015
- December 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- February 2014
- November 2013
- October 2013
- June 2013
- January 2013
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- January 2012
- October 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- March 2005
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
NYT vs. SF Examiner on illegal storefront billboards
Why is the San Francisco Examiner doing a better job of reporting on illegal advertising than the New York Times? Less than 10 days ago the Times published a story on billboards appearing on vacant storefronts. It almost reads like an ad itself: Taking advantage of all the abandoned retail spaces in urban areas, marketers […]