ask your good friend the mayor who represented the french company  from the start.

the local person who handled the contract from the very start together with her husband are very good friends with our blithering nitwit bagman mayor. ma

What do you expect when NOBODY wants to pay taxes or ANYTHING for that matter.  People need to stop railing against imaginary financial plots and intrigue.   Thinking all would be good if ONLY we could squeeze every last ounce of "corruption" and "waste" out of government,  life would be grand for all.   How many times has the former Garden been renamed.   DOES anybody remember it's official name.  (I certainly don't).   It's had more name changes than a convict in the witness protection program.

THANK YOU! I, too, have noticed this explosion. The city has completely abandoned any architectural or streetscape aesthetic and allowed unnecessary objects, many simply for ad space - some do claim a public purpose, like trash receptacles, but now they are where they were never needed, placed on narrow sidewalks, within 50 feet of each other, bearing an extra wide ad. This is not what public property is for, and our kids already face too much marketing. The side of a bus shelter or bathroom I can deal with, but useless mini billboards? Too much.

my gosh, McGrory almost sounds like he comes from Hingham!!

It's only going to get worse. Pending changes to the state billboard regulations will (i) exempt these signs from spacing requirements (it used to be that they'd have to be at least 100 square feet apart), (ii) increase the maximum size of these things from 25 square feet to 275 square feet, (iii) allow them in residential areas and (iv) allow them to be digital/blinking. I'd be interested in what the actual revenue share is between Decaux and the city. Thanks Patrick and Menino - nothing drives tourist dollars away more than a crap-looking city!

Okay, fine, the ads stink but this column would have been better had it examined the city's alternatives for raising that $14 million.

Fortunately, here in Boston we have a vibrant, thriving city in which advertisers are willing to spend good money to reach their markets and audiences. Good thing, too, because if the city tried to raise that revenue through taxes then the columnists would be out there interviewing the downtrodden about how they're being "squeezed" and "hammered."

Mr. McGrory, please identify in your next column your favorite couple of ideas for how the city can replace that $14 million in revenue through activities that better suit your aesthetic sensibilities.  Or, maybe you can identify for us $14 million in the city budget that we can do away with.  Until then, as someone who actually lives in the city, I will accept gladly this trade-off so that we can continue to keep the city functioning, clean, beautiful and progressing. 

I couldn't agree more.  It's embarrassing how easily we sell ourselves out.  I know the city needs the money, and people scream bloody murder if you try to either decrease spending or increase taxes.  So this is what we get - idiocracy in the flesh.

People want all kinds of services delivered by state and local government, yet nobody wants their taxes to increase. They have to get the money somewhere.

They have them in Chicago too, I noticed them when I visited recently. My biggest problem with them is that as they say "City Map" in Boston, they say "City Information" in Chicago. Since I was visiting and needed city information, I was tricked by a few of them thinking that the information must be on the other side and only finding an ad for Top Shop. The other problem is that they really distract your attention from the city around you. That's especially disappointing in a beautiful city and it can't do much for tourists especially.

Advertising is a pollution of our radio, tv, computers, phones, etc.. We need limits. I believe a maximum of 6 minutes per hour of broadcast time ( 10%) be allowed for advertising and this should include advertising current and future shows ( yes you too PBS) This is only one of two developed countries that allows drug advertising on TV. I saw advertising on almost all available surfaces when I attended a local college football game. Come on folks, we are better than this.

Thank you Brian!!! For the last 3-4 years I've been asking my wife when America became such a commercialized whorehouse. Nothing wrong with advertising in moderation but its so out of control. Thank God for the DVR and the FF button.

I remember the adds promoting the Papa Doc Duvalier governmnent of Haiti, the Trujillo dictatorship in the Dominican Republic, and now the Assad dictatorship in Syria.  These PR firms would sell anything or anyone to make a buck.

I agree with Brian for a change.  Of course, my commuting view of Dorchester Bay and the Kennedy Library would be much improved if the Globe would take the 300 foot billboard off its roof. While they are at it, maybe a few newspaper boxes could disappear too.

I typically would support Brian on thios argument.  But I believe the ad company behind the kiosks is helping to keep Boston a cleaner city--no meran accomplishment in Our Fair City.

The only function of the bus shelters in Copley Square is to display ads. With only two sides, they provide no shelter in windy Copley Square. The city could make even more money if they replaced them with three-sided shelters.