Unsure about the effectiveness of banning air travel ads. If you have a compelling reason to go somewhere the time savings of air travel often make it a no-brainer compared to other forms of transport. Banning oil ads seems more effective long term because there alternative forms of energy for most purposes, and it helps to mitigate fossil fuel propaganda.
> you have a compelling reason to go somewhere the time savings of air travel often make it a no-brainer compared to other forms of transport
People who have strong reasons to fly aren't really the main audience for those adverts, then. It's more about advertising cheap fights to Italy for example.
Wanting a holiday in Italy is a compelling reason (for consumers). My point is that it's more rational to fly somewhere than to spend much longer traveling by slower methods. If you want to take a vacation on a different continent, trying to go there and back by ship will consume all your available time.
The existence of air travel is its own incentive; every time someone looks up and sees a plane in the sky, it's a reminder that they could fly somewhere. Flight advertising is just about market share, ie which airline will you choose for the flight you already want to take.
My point is that many people might not consider a flight to Italy unless they see an advertisement telling them it's only 30 euros this week. Without the advertisement they would not travel at all. People who are already in the market for a holiday to Italy are of course not included. It's people on the fence that we're talking about.
It's also funny given that The Hague is specifically an international destination for diplomats. So the city itself contributes more to international flights than any billboards ever did.
High-ranking officials (like presidents, kings, prime ministers) come in their own private jets, sometimes more than one. It's not like you can have 30 prime ministers coming on the same cheap airline plane.
There is no compelling reason to fly to Bali from the Hague each year. Except the weather ofc. People just like it. Because the weather. Did I complain about the weather in Holland already? No? It was raining again. The summer is gone.
But why the ad doesn't have a big fat letter warning like cigarettes do? "Flying increases amount of CO2 in the athmosphere which we have no way to decrease and causes big fucking misery, wrath of God and more pressure on the housing market"
> Unsure about the effectiveness of banning air travel ads. If you have a compelling reason to go somewhere (...)
I'm not sure you realize this, but travel ads are used to create demand among those who do not have a compelling reason to go to the advertised travel destination. That's the point, and the whole reason they are posted. I mean, if you already have a compelling reason to go somewhere, how would an advertisement affect you?
Travel ads and air travel ads are not the same thing. If you put up a billboard showing some cool/interesting place, people will be fractionally more inclined to go there - although as I said above, I think people mostly think of places they want to go and then use advertising to help choose who to give money to to achieve that end.
Ads for airlines aren't encouraging people to fly so much as inviting them to choose one carrier over another. If you have X people going from Den Haag to Neu Amsterdam and there are multiple airlines serving that route, then airlines have to compete on price, comfort, customer service, etc. Nobody looks at an airline advert and then tries to think of a place to go in order to enjoy flying on a plane.
