HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #9961  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 12:33 AM
jsbrook jsbrook is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 2,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyscraper View Post
oh for God's sake, can we drop the identity politics?
just because the people they chose to show in one rendering aren't "diverse" enough, it doesn't bode well for the success for the project?
Please. Iditiotic.
It was an article. It didn't originate here. It's something people noticed. Any savvy person who lives in this world could have anticipated it would be and recognized the issues with the rendering. Whether you think it's hypersensitive or not, it was a foreseeable reaction in this world. This and other things that have occurred on this project cast doubts about the developer's savviness and ability to identify and deliver what it is in demand. Still, I don't think the project is destined to fail for the reasons I just posted.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9962  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 12:59 AM
Jayfar's Avatar
Jayfar Jayfar is offline
Midrise
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 573
Quote:
Originally Posted by eixample View Post
I believe PHA has moved out of their Chestnut Street HQ into temporary office space while they wait for the new Sharswood HQ to get built. I wonder if that means redevelopment of the Chestnut Street site is imminent....?
Uh, they vacated the 2012 Chestnut St building over 10 years ago, it's been empty ever since. PHA has had their Center City offices at 12 S. 23rd Street for a long time.

Here's what's planned for the old PHA office site:

Affordable housing in the mix for apartment project at old PHA headquarters | Philly.com

Quote:
The deal would require Alterra, which is partnering on the project with Rheal Capital Management LLC of New York, to rent 40 of the project’s 200 or so apartments to low-income residents, the agency said in a statement.
Quote:
The PHA’s 89-year-old, four-story headquarters building has been vacant since January 2008, when the agency finished dividing its operations between two locations in Center City and Grays Ferry that it currently occupies. The agency plans to consolidate those offices eventually at a headquarters building proposed for the North Philadelphia neighborhood of Sharswood, which is north of Girard College.
__________________
Philadelphia Industrial & Commercial Heritage
A public Facebook group to promote the appreciation of Greater Philadelphia's industrial and commercial history and advocate for historic preservation and adaptive re-use.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9963  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 1:37 AM
eixample eixample is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayfar View Post
Uh, they vacated the 2012 Chestnut St building over 10 years ago, it's been empty ever since. PHA has had their Center City offices at 12 S. 23rd Street for a long time.

Here's what's planned for the old PHA office site:

Affordable housing in the mix for apartment project at old PHA headquarters | Philly.com
Oh okay, but they DID just move out of their HQ on 23rd street in the last few weeks. Do you know what's going on with that building?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9964  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 1:42 AM
skyscraper skyscraper is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsbrook View Post
It was an article. It didn't originate here. It's something people noticed. Any savvy person who lives in this world could have anticipated it would be and recognized the issues with the rendering. Whether you think it's hypersensitive or not, it was a foreseeable reaction in this world. This and other things that have occurred on this project cast doubts about the developer's savviness and ability to identify and deliver what it is in demand. Still, I don't think the project is destined to fail for the reasons I just posted.
If by "savvy" you mean "pandering to the hypersensitive politically correct crowd who expect to be catered to", then you're right, they're not that savvy. But I think they're sophisticated enough to know that their market aren't influenced by such idiotic things as how many people of color are depicted in a fucking rendering.
__________________
"Difficult times produce strong people. Strong people produce good times. Good times produce weak people. Weak people produce difficult times."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9965  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 1:54 AM
Jayfar's Avatar
Jayfar Jayfar is offline
Midrise
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 573
Quote:
Originally Posted by eixample View Post
Oh okay, but they DID just move out of their HQ on 23rd street in the last few weeks. Do you know what's going on with that building?
I don't know. It's still an active parking garage. I don't know how much of the building was occupied by PHA (and Manna). I understand it was originally built in the late 70s as the Red Cross Annex.

http://li.phila.gov/#summary?address=12+S+23rd+St

I see they have new permits to do a fit-out for an outpatient care facility on part of the first floor.

http://li.phila.gov/#details?entity=...s=12+S+23rd+St

Permit Number
836408
Application Type
ALTERATION PERMIT
Permit Type
ALT-MAJOR ALTERATION
Date Issued
Tue Jan 09 2018
Work Description
INTERIOR FIT OUT OF OUTPATIENT CARE ON THE FIRST FLOOR AS PER PLANS. SEPARATE PERMITS REQUIRED FOR M, E, P. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS FOR WELDING, STEEL FRAME JOINTS, HIGH STRENGTH BOLTS, NUTS AND WASHERS INSPECTED BY LIEB INSPECTIONS AND TESTING INC AGENCY; POST-INSTALLED CONCRETE ANCHORS TO BE INSPECTED BY THOMAS LOUIS.
Status
ACTIVE

http://li.phila.gov/#details?entity=...s=12+S+23rd+St

Permit Number
841588
Application Type
USE PERMIT
Permit Type
USE-USE CHANGE FOR PARTOF BLDG
Date Issued
Tue Jan 09 2018
Work Description
FOR A PERSONAL SERVICES (OUTPATIENT CARE BUSINESS) ON PARTIAL 1ST FLOOR.
Status
COMPLETED
__________________
Philadelphia Industrial & Commercial Heritage
A public Facebook group to promote the appreciation of Greater Philadelphia's industrial and commercial history and advocate for historic preservation and adaptive re-use.

Last edited by Jayfar; Mar 18, 2018 at 2:06 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9966  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 2:28 AM
jsbrook jsbrook is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 2,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyscraper View Post
If by "savvy" you mean "pandering to the hypersensitive politically correct crowd who expect to be catered to", then you're right, they're not that savvy. But I think they're sophisticated enough to know that their market aren't influenced by such idiotic things as how many people of color are depicted in a fucking rendering.
Think you are wrong. These developers and this project leave a lot to be desired. Hopefully it will be still be successful for the reasons I said and the fundamentals are strong enough despite looking like it will turn out ugly and not an aesthetic draw or an environment where upscale people will want to pass the time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9967  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 2:31 AM
eixample eixample is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyscraper View Post
oh for God's sake, can we drop the identity politics?
just because the people they chose to show in one rendering aren't "diverse" enough, it doesn't bode well for the success for the project?
Please. Iditiotic.
I don't think we should read too much into a couple of renders but the reason "identity politics" kinda makes sense here is that the Gallery was seen as having a predominantly black clientele and the redevelopment could be seen as making it a place that would also appeal to white people. I don't think they PREIT is trying to exclude black people with this development but there is the perception at least that they are turning a black space into a white space (there was an article about this when the gallery closed).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9968  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 4:06 AM
allovertown allovertown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 645
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyscraper View Post
If by "savvy" you mean "pandering to the hypersensitive politically correct crowd who expect to be catered to", then you're right, they're not that savvy. But I think they're sophisticated enough to know that their market aren't influenced by such idiotic things as how many people of color are depicted in a fucking rendering.
Pandering to the politically sensitive crowd? There's nothing more sensitive than white man when he's called on his BS. Your bombastic overreactions to legitimate concerns can be marked as exhibit A.

What is it you're not getting? I'm not exactly getting the vibe that people are boo hooing that no one looks like them in the rendering. The conplaints have had a bit more nuance than that.

The truth is that PREIT probably just uses these stock people in all their renderings and no one normally notices because they tend to be doing stuff in Lilly white suburbia. THAT is the issue. This is not the suburbs, this is a critical project that they got a ton of public money for, and they're not looking like they're up to the task.

I don't really care that all the people in the rendering are white, but the fact that they are, indicates to me that the people putting together the rendering are simply not familiar with the location and the surrounding area. Because if they actually knew the area and made these renderings packed with white people, it would stand out and look as stupid to them as it did to many of us.

So the fact that white people are the only people in the renderings doesn't hurt my feelings. It just makes me concerned that the people making them and designing this project are clueless about market east and Philadelphia. In the grand scheme, it doesn't really matter. Taken in concert with everything else though, it gets harder and harder to have confidence in what they're doing.

In the end I don't think it matters if the building looks like dog shit, or that the people at PREIT can't successfully create a rendering if their lives depended on it. To me, as long as they succeed in opening to the street, and most importantly, get the right mix of retail, I think they'll do just fine. But I get why people were concerned.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9969  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 5:04 AM
mja mja is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 288
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyscraper View Post
oh for God's sake, can we drop the identity politics?
just because the people they chose to show in one rendering aren't "diverse" enough, it doesn't bode well for the success for the project?
Please. Iditiotic.
Identity politics? It's just fucking common sense. "Diverse" enough? THERE'S NOT ONE PERSON OF COLOR in two renderings picturing dozens and maybe hundreds of people. In a minority-majority city. At a major transportation hub. Close your eyes and picture yourself in the Gallery. Do see black people?, because I sure as hell do.

I know some of my fellow white people just don't handle talking about race very well, but there's just no excuse for this. It's Keystone Cops levels of stupid, and it's fucked up. I realize you don't see that it's fucked up, but it most assuredly is. Then you have the bizarre material choices & the questionable concept, and the whole thing starts to feel like amateur hour.

Look, I want nothing more than for this project (and any project in the city) to be a smashing success, but this was just shitty incompetence, and it's not "identity politics" to point that out.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9970  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 5:14 AM
mja mja is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kidphilly View Post
saw this wonder if they got the idea from the post your quoted
I would doubt that. I just think a lot of people would just look at the renderings and have the exact same reaction, it's that glaringly obvious.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9971  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 11:46 AM
City Wide City Wide is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by City Wide View Post
I see white people
I also see mostly younger people.

On the list of positive and negative concerns related to this project, the people in the drawings make the list, but near the bottom. If the energy shown in these drawings is ever matched even by 50% in reality I'll be pleasantly surprised. I still wish that building one of the possible towers was included in the present construction, I would feel more encouraged.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9972  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 12:07 PM
iheartphilly iheartphilly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by mja View Post
Identity politics? It's just fucking common sense. "Diverse" enough? THERE'S NOT ONE PERSON OF COLOR in two renderings picturing dozens and maybe hundreds of people. In a minority-majority city. At a major transportation hub. Close your eyes and picture yourself in the Gallery. Do see black people?, because I sure as hell do.

I know some of my fellow white people just don't handle talking about race very well, but there's just no excuse for this. It's Keystone Cops levels of stupid, and it's fucked up. I realize you don't see that it's fucked up, but it most assuredly is. Then you have the bizarre material choices & the questionable concept, and the whole thing starts to feel like amateur hour.

Look, I want nothing more than for this project (and any project in the city) to be a smashing success, but this was just shitty incompetence, and it's not "identity politics" to point that out.
Isn’t it just like advertising? In between a tv show when commercials air, I rarely see Asians, Indians, Latinos, or Middle Easterners on commercials and if I see the former, it usually involves some kind of Asian stereotype portrayed in the commercials. So it could be the commercials are targeting the audience who is predominantly white who would then see themselves buying the product or service being advertised. So, if I take that analysis and apply it to the render that we are taking about, it would seem to be the same. And on that basis, I agree with you. I fault the people who did this render for not knowing their demographics of the project. And, I agree with you that the rendering should be representative of the people in the city. But I don’t think it should be taken as a “race” equality issue or whatever. I hope you don’t get too worked up or angry like before and to try to Give those who worked on the render the benefit of the doubt.

Last edited by iheartphilly; Mar 18, 2018 at 12:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9973  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 12:39 PM
Jayfar's Avatar
Jayfar Jayfar is offline
Midrise
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 573
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsbrook View Post
It was an article. It didn't originate here. It's something people noticed. Any savvy person who lives in this world could have anticipated it would be and recognized the issues with the rendering. Whether you think it's hypersensitive or not, it was a foreseeable reaction in this world. This and other things that have occurred on this project cast doubts about the developer's savviness and ability to identify and deliver what it is in demand. Still, I don't think the project is destined to fail for the reasons I just posted.
And then too, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Here's a bit of nostalgia from a couple years before my arrival on the shores of Philly. We take you to 1978, when the Gallery I at Market East was shiny and new:

Rouse Philadelphia Inc. v. Ad Hoc'78

Excerpt:
On August 25, 1978, the defendant, T. Milton Street, and a large group of persons estimated to be from three to five thousand (3000 to 5000) strong, massed at various locations in and around the entrances to a downtown shopping mall in Center City Philadelphia known as The Gallery. They also converged on Gimbels Department Store located in the same area. Ingress and egress to both The Gallery and Gimbels was rendered difficult and, at times, impossible, by the group's activities.

The defendant and three to five hundred (300 to 500) of the demonstrators then entered The Gallery and marched throughout the mall shouting in loud voices and bringing business therein to a virtual standstill. The defendant spoke to the throng with the aid of sound amplification equipment and urged a boycott of the businesses in the mall.

*60 A temporary restraining order was promulgated by the court below on August 26, 1978, and on January 31, 1979, the court below entered an order enjoining the defendant and the persons acting in concert with him from "picketing, handbilling, speechmaking, demonstrating, and boycotting inside or outside The Gallery or Gimbels . . ." The court defined the area from which defendants were enjoined from engaging in the aforesaid activities as "the public areas therein [The Gallery and Gimbels], or any of the three colonnades located outside the entrance to Gimbels, or the exterior courtyard area, or the sidewalk which forms the immediate perimeter surrounding The Gallery, Gimbels and Strawbridge Store."

On February 22, 1979, the defendant and thirty-seven (37) other persons were arrested at The Gallery for allegedly violating the January 31, 1979 injunction decree. A hearing was then held at which witnesses testified that: Street and two hundred and fifty (250) to three hundred (300) people had congregated on the northeast corner of 10th and Market Streets in Philadelphia, in front of The Gallery and Gimbels; they also had congregated on the sidewalk and in the colonnades area of the mall; the group shouted and blocked the entrance to The Gallery and Gimbels; because they stood close together they were successful in preventing people from entering the stores; that during the incident members of the defendant's group chanted and shouted "boycott" to persons attempting to enter The Gallery; that a police officer, who had been empowered to enforce the court order enjoining the demonstration gave the defendant Street and his attorney copies of the January 31, 1979 order; that an officer then read the court order to the group using sound amplification equipment but the group continued to shout and chant "boycott" as the order was read to them; and that after giving the group five minutes to disburse the police arrested defendant Street and thirty-seven (37) of his followers. At the hearing defendant Street was given the opportunity to address the court and informed the court that despite the court order he intended "to go back to The Gallery tomorrow".

*61 On February 23, 1979, defendant Street went to The Gallery again and led a group of demonstrators onto the northeast corner of 10th and Market Streets. After being notified of the defendant's actions the court ordered the arrest of persons violating the January 31, 1979 Order. Street was one of the persons arrested. A hearing was held at 1:30 P.M. on February 23, 1979. Testimony adduced at the hearing revealed that at 11:20 A.M., the defendant led a group of thirty-five (35) protestors to the northwest corner of 10th and Market Streets then crossed the intersection. The group was shouting "boycott, boycott" throughout the incident. As the police attempted to read the court order of January 31, 1979 to them, the group marched east on the north side of Market Street for a distance of approximately twenty (20) feet then turned around and marched back to the northeast corner. This area lies in front of The Gallery. The defendant then led his group to a SEPTA boarding island which runs east to west in the 900 block of Market Street on the north side and is about twenty (20) feet from the sidewalk. During this period the group continued to chant "boycott, boycott, boycott The Gallery", which chanting was clearly audible to persons located at the entrances to and on the sidewalk in front of The Gallery. At this point defendant and his followers were arrested.

After the hearing, the defendant was found in civil contempt of court and was committed for ninety (90) days, conditioned upon his right to purge himself of the contempt by assuring the court that he would, in the future, abide by the court order until such order was vacated or stayed. He was also fined Five Thousand ($5,000) Dollars. On February 26, 1979, Street filed an appeal to this Court.

Defendant's first argument is that the court order prohibiting the "picketing, handbilling, speechmaking, demonstrating and boycotting of The Gallery" constituted an unconstitutional violation of defendant's First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and expression. Defendant's brief states at length defendant's belief that certain federal monies used in the construction of the downtown shopping *62 mall should have been used instead to provide for low-income housing for residents of North Central Philadelphia. Defendant also claims that his protest was justifiable because he was protesting the fact that only one business in the mall was black owned. Defendant claims that since The Gallery is owned by The Redevelopment Authority of Philadelphia (RDA) that his boycott was one of a public building. However, the RDA leased the mall to Rouse Corporation for ninety-nine (99) years and Rouse, in turn, rents individual space within the mall to ninety-four (94) private owners. Thus, it is apparent that The Gallery is indeed comprised of ninety-four (94) private businesses and boycotting or picketing of it constitutes the boycotting or picketing of private business. Gimbels and Strawbridge and Clothier are private businesses and own the buildings adjacent to the mall in fee simple. Under such circumstances we find that the demonstrations in question were clearly directed at private businesses.

Defendant also argues that the court order was not lawful because the objective of the boycott was "to communicate a message to government regarding the expenditure of public monies". At the various hearings held on this matter it was shown that: the demonstrators shouted and chanted so loudly that normal conversation was impossible anywhere in the vicinity; that the group occupied virtually all of the walkways, stairs, and escalators in The Gallery; that the demonstrators carried umbrellas and signs which they brandished in a vigorous fashion; that a group of the demonstrators sat down and sprawled in the walkways of The Gallery and in the "Market Fair" area of the mall which is an area containing approximately twenty (20) fast food restaurants in the western end of the mall; that when so situated they listened to and gave speeches over amplifying equipment and stood on tables in the restaurants thereby denying patrons of ingress and egress to the area; that as a result of this activity shops in the mall closed, patrons left the area and business in the mall and other stores was brought to a virtual standstill. It was also shown that on *63 certain occasions during the demonstration several demonstrators had entered a McDonald's restaurant in the mall and had told patrons that the food was horsemeat and had maggots in it. At a bakery in the mall (Tiffany's) disparaging remarks about the quality of food were also made to the store's patrons and one demonstrator stuck her finger in her nose and then touched the produce. Several demonstrators had engaged in violent incidents during the picketing. One demonstrator, a Terrence Potter, had tripped the owner of the bakery during a demonstration. A group of demonstrators then gathered in front of the bakery and shouted obscene comments and racial slurs at the owner. Potter had also threatened to beat up another merchant in the mall. Another demonstrator, Harry Miller, had threatened to break a merchant's jaw. A group of demonstrators also threatened an elderly female patron of the mall telling her to get out of there "while she could still walk". The demonstrators also ignited a number of fires throughout the mall by igniting the refuse in trash receptacles located throughout the mall. It was also proven that Street had forged a copy of the court order of October 6, 1978 and had distributed copies of the forged order throughout the throng. The forged document distorted the court order so as to convey the impression that it was leafletting material. Street and other demonstrators had given several speeches in which they stated that the purpose of the demonstration was to bankrupt merchants in The Gallery and Gimbels. They also demanded "reparations" from Rouse, Gimbels and the other merchants. They demanded that appellees pay money to black, Spanish-speaking and poor white neighborhoods as "reparations" for the money spent by the Redevelopment Authority on the mall.


[snip]
__________________
Philadelphia Industrial & Commercial Heritage
A public Facebook group to promote the appreciation of Greater Philadelphia's industrial and commercial history and advocate for historic preservation and adaptive re-use.

Last edited by Jayfar; Mar 18, 2018 at 7:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9974  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 2:38 PM
jsbrook jsbrook is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 2,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayfar View Post
And then too, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

1978, when the Gallery I at Market East was shiny and new:

Rouse Philadelphia Inc. v. Ad Hoc'78
Right. Philadelphians are more discerning than they were in years past too. If they want to attract the kind of tenants and customers they claim to, not looking and feeling like shit would be a good start. PREIT owns some upscale shopping malls but also plenty of shitty, downmarket shopping malls. This is shaping up like the latter. I'm not excited about spending time here. I will reserve judgment until completion, but it's not looking too promising thus far. Nothing seems very interesting to me except for a nice downtown movie theater with cushy seats and alcohol.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9975  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 5:29 PM
EastSideHBG's Avatar
EastSideHBG EastSideHBG is offline
Me?!?
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Philadelphia Metro (Norristown, PA)
Posts: 10,013
Hold up, is this all about the two big renderings with people in them?!? The ones where I see Asian, Hispanic...

Quote:
Originally Posted by allovertown View Post
The truth is that PREIT probably just uses these stock people in all their renderings and no one normally notices because they tend to be doing stuff in Lilly white suburbia. THAT is the issue. This is not the suburbs, this is a critical project that they got a ton of public money for, and they're not looking like they're up to the task.
Gotta love the diversity crowd who tries to win fans to their cause by tossing out subtle racial insults of their own.

Note to all rendering creators: be sure to throw in some glaringly obvious color into your renderings or else you'll be a racist. And if you'd like you can use all Black, Hispanic...that will be okay. Just please don't make it all white because then THAT is bad.
__________________
Right before your eyes you're victimized, guys, that's the world of today, and it ain't civilized...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9976  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 6:40 PM
Daario Daario is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 110
This really isn't that big of a deal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9977  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 9:10 PM
jsbrook jsbrook is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 2,578
Anyone have any pics of views of the Center City skyline from Society Hill Towers? Wondering what views from Scannapieco 3.0 might look like and views from the Western Tower seems a decent proxy. I imagine they’d be pretty decent since there are good views from Borrh and South Philly in spots that are a decent bit away from Center City.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9978  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 9:37 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is offline
Leftist Correctist
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Spaceship Earth
Posts: 5,079
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartphilly View Post
Isn’t it just like advertising? In between a tv show when commercials air, I rarely see Asians, Indians, Latinos, or Middle Easterners on commercials and if I see the former, it usually involves some kind of Asian stereotype portrayed in the commercials. So it could be the commercials are targeting the audience who is predominantly white who would then see themselves buying the product or service being advertised. So, if I take that analysis and apply it to the render that we are taking about, it would seem to be the same. And on that basis, I agree with you. I fault the people who did this render for not knowing their demographics of the project. And, I agree with you that the rendering should be representative of the people in the city. But I don’t think it should be taken as a “race” equality issue or whatever. I hope you don’t get too worked up or angry like before and to try to Give those who worked on the render the benefit of the doubt.
I'm not sure what TV commercials you're watching, but it sounds like commercials up to the 1990's not 2018. TV ads are absolutely chock full of asian, hispanic, black and mixed-race people, albeit yes usually young and good looking, and often to a point where they are actually over-rep'd as a percentage of the population. Not that there's anything wrong with that - just like a Sunday paper discount dept. store ad has a perfect balance of chiseled white guys, asian little boys (because let's be honest, they're the cutest), hispanic teens and usually lighter skinned black ladies. That wasn't the case 25 years ago. Just sayin.
__________________
You slip me the cash and I'll slip you the wiener. <><><><><><>IMPEACHMENT NOW!

For me it can be reduced to this: For every personal freedom we gained from the automobile, we lost in social cohesion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9979  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 11:19 PM
iheartphilly iheartphilly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
I'm not sure what TV commercials you're watching, but it sounds like commercials up to the 1990's not 2018. TV ads are absolutely chock full of asian, hispanic, black and mixed-race people, albeit yes usually young and good looking, and often to a point where they are actually over-rep'd as a percentage of the population. Not that there's anything wrong with that - just like a Sunday paper discount dept. store ad has a perfect balance of chiseled white guys, asian little boys (because let's be honest, they're the cutest), hispanic teens and usually lighter skinned black ladies. That wasn't the case 25 years ago. Just sayin.
I watch prime time tv on the major networks. So they are prime time commercials. And, my observations are that 90+ percent of the tv commercials are not full of asians, blacks, hispanics, or mixed-raced. Advertisers target their audiences and in generally, asians and mixed-raced are low on the demographics list by virture of how the US population breaks down by ethnicity. Of course, I'm talking about the Philly Metro media market. Maybe that's different on the West Coast or Gulf Coast states like Texas. Advertisers don't advertise randomly. They know their markets. It is also well known that advertisers do they market research, focus groups, etc. before launching ad campaigns.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9980  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2018, 11:31 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is offline
Leftist Correctist
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Spaceship Earth
Posts: 5,079
Have you seen a Target commercial?
__________________
You slip me the cash and I'll slip you the wiener. <><><><><><>IMPEACHMENT NOW!

For me it can be reduced to this: For every personal freedom we gained from the automobile, we lost in social cohesion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:52 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.