Why the "Made in Oregon" sign controversy matters
Kari Chisholm
We've had quite a bit of discussion around here about the "Made in Oregon" sign that the University of Oregon would like to rebrand with their name.
Of course, there's been a healthy amount of "Who cares? It's a sign!" feedback. In a substantially more thoughtful way, Multnomah County Chair Ted Wheeler argued (right here on BlueOregon):
Rather than debating a sign, however, I hope that we pull together with our higher education leaders and help them leverage PSU, OHSU, PCC and other institutions into a world class educational system that could truly drive economic development and job creation in Portland. Think UW and what it has done for Seattle...
And Ted's right. Portland needs a world-class research university.
But that's why Ted's wrong about the sign.
Portland State could be that world-class research university, especially if combined with OHSU (either formally, or informally.)
However, that effort would be substantially damaged by allowing the phrase "University of Oregon" to be splashed across the city skyline. Like it or not, this is about brand image. We want visitors to our city to know that we've got a university right here in Portland that we're proud of.
This is not just any sign. This is a sign that is featured worldwide in photos of our city skyline. It's a sign that's readily visible to visitors as they arrive downtown from the airport or via I-84 and I-5. And frankly, that's why UO is working so hard to get their brand on the river-facing sign.
If UO wants to slap a big ol' sign on the other side of the building, no problem here. If they want to replace that neon cocktail glass that appears over I-405 at holiday time, that's just fine.
It's easy to dismiss marketing and branding as silly, meaningless, or trivial. It's not. Especially when it's critical to our regional economic development to communicate that Portland is working to produce a world-class research university right in downtown.
 |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Mar 24, '09
It is worth remembering that the University of Oregon has fought Portland State's growth and funding every step of the way over the years. They've been ferocious in opposing housing for PSU students for example - they have not wanted PSU to become known as a residential university.
In a state that has not provided much aid to higher education (I come from Ohio and I was shocked when I moved here in 1978 at the state of the university system), the Ducks want to be the beneficiary of what state largess there is . . . now more than ever. As Guido the Killer Pimp declared in Risky Business: "In times of economic uncertainty, never ever fuck with another man's livelihood." Frohnmayer = Guido.
Mar 24, '09
Personally, I think the Made in Oregon sign is the coolest thing going as you drive into the city from the airport at night. I love it and hope we can find a way to keep it.
That said, the person/entity that owns the sign, erects the sign, maintains the sign and pays the electric bill for the sign has every right to do whatever they want with the sign. If we want to keep the sign as is, and I hope we do, the City or some non-profit needs to buy the sign from U of O and agree to maintain it for years to come. If not, I fear the likely outcome is that we will lose the sign altogether. Bashing U of O is not going to save the sign.
Mar 24, '09
This argument makes no sense. The University of Oregon already has a branch in Portland. You're telling them, hey, being here is fine, just don't advertise it. Huh what?
I don't get the reference to OHSU, which is quasi-autonomous, right? We've also got something in Beaverton called the Oregon Graduate Institute for advanced degrees in certain high-tech fields, right? Or is OGI now just a division of OHSU?
There are a couple of fundamental problem, I would suggest:
(1) Oregon simply has too many state-supported colleges and universities for the actual state population, with funding spread way too thinly. The reason for this is undoubtedly a matter of history and the "all politics is local" maxim: thus we have little state universities spread all over the state, presumably owing to legislators from particular districts steering money into their districts.
(2) The idea that every state university is supposed to be a center of "world-class research" simply does not cut it. The desire for PSU as a leading research center is again driven by parochial political concerns and fails to reflect present realities. Universities all across the US grew like mad in the post-World War II era owing to a huge infusion of federal funds. Until about the mid-1980s, it seemed as though the sky was the limit, with new and expanding universities accommodating all the news Ph.D.'s being churned out, and federal grant moneys readily available. But in the last 20 to 25 years, the situation has radically changed as the amount of research moneys per potential researcher has plummeted. If you don't believe me, just talk to professors at places like UO or OSU. You'll hear that it's common for people to write 8, 10, 12 proposals for every one that gets funded. Federally funded research at universities is very much a zero-sum game. This does not deter university administrators, of course, whose existence is wrapped up in the fantasy that every professor can find himself or herself awash in grant moneys if they just try hard enough.
Mar 24, '09
As an alumni of UO, I will admit this does seem a little rude. However, I remember during my years in Eugene there were several periods of incessant PSU advertising, running in Eugene. During several big football games I saw those ads, during the news, etc. So if Portland is going to say that UO can't advertise here, Eugene needs to say PSU can't advertise there, which I doubt would ever happen.
Mar 24, '09
It matters because it is an example of a person or entity, because of who they are and how much they have, are force feeding , down the throats of the population, something that really isn't needed, but 'has to be done' because 'it is a good idea'. Just because they have the resources, they feel they are entiltled to force it down our throats because those being forced onto have no money or resources to be any threat, legal or otherwise.
It is the same deal with those pushing for a re-name of the streets for chavez. It is also the same with those who are pushing all those 'green agenda' issues and items. All are shoving these items down our throats because they are 'entilted' to do so by calling it 'a good idea'.
Just remember, shove a lot of things down our throats, and we will eventually start throwing it all back up into your faces.
Just because it is "a good idea' does not entitle you to shove it down our throats and tell us 'it's for your own good'.
Mar 24, '09
The effort to build PSU into a world-class research university will succeed or fail without any regard to what's written underneath the deer on the old White Stag sign. The sign won't help or hurt, let alone "substantially damage" the effort.
This sign debate is utterly trivial, and exaggerating the impact of "branding" doesn't make it any more important.
Mar 24, '09
Not all of us feel that the U of O sign would be "shoved down our throats." Once I realized that the Made in Oregon sign was an advertisement for a company and not some state pride thing, I lost all interest in protecting it as a message. It's simply crass commercial speech on a neat historical sign, and speech that hasn't even been around for all that long. If it still said White Satin or whatever, then maybe I'd give a fig about protecting it, but those days are gone. Fact is, I'd feel more pride, as an Oregonian (I'm more than just a Portlander), in letting U of O represent themselves on a sign they pay for.
Mar 24, '09
"This argument makes no sense. The University of Oregon already has a branch in Portland. You're telling them, hey, being here is fine, just don't advertise it." joel dan walls
They can advertise the university. They should advertise it, but the point is, they shouldn't advertise it on that particular sign.
I'm trying to figure out what a jumping deer juxtaposed with the university's name, is supposed to convey about the university. Perhaps the deer should also be replaced...with a duck, laying a big fat egg.
2:04 p.m.
Mar 24, '09
The reality is that the "Made in Oregon" slogan was BOTH a business's branding and a state pride thing. As an ambassador of sorts to non-Oregonians traveling through Portland, I can't imagine a better ambassador for Oregon-made products than the existing sign regardless of what those products are.
Speaking of branding... As branding goes this new scheme is schizo, to put it kindly. The U-of-O's mascot isn't a reindeer.
Back to the existing sign. I speak only for myself, but as the proud craftsman behind a truly unique product that, to my knowledge, is unlike anything made anywhere else in the world... Even though I never tried to sell my rainsticks through the Made in Oregon stores (although I did consider it), I take a great deal of personal pride as an Oregon craftsman every time I drive by the current sign at night when it's all lit up. Make of that what you will, but it's God's honest truth.
2:15 p.m.
Mar 24, '09
I must have missed the evidence provided that this would "substantially damage" PSU's reputation in any way. How would it do so, exactly? For one thing, it doesn't say anything about PSU now, so how is this somehow a net negative for their own publicity? What, if the sign says Ducks, people will think we closed down PSU to accomodate them? Is the argument really that the sign will inhibit PSU's growth, endowment, faculty retention or grant funding? If so, by all means explain.
Mar 24, '09
Douglas K nailed it. Trying to bring branding and economic development into this argument is a stretch.
Kari posts a lot on this site and every once in a while we get a "defend-Sam-via-Twitters" or "bloggers-aren't-real-journalists" article.
He's still running well ahead of Sturgeon's Law, give him credit.
Mar 24, '09
Kari, I completely disagree with you and Commissioner Leonard on this one. U of O wants to invest in the Old Town community. The university has deep connections to Portland- OHSU was UO's medical school until 1974- and the city should welcome renovations to a blighted area and a sign that, in its present form, is frankly pretty tacky. (This isn't the Schnitzer marquee being renamed, after all.) U of O is paying to light the sign, and host the sign, and I would love to see it updated. The sign will be focused on Oregon- it's not like the Huskies are moving in.
The arguments against it seem petty and provincial, and seem more about Portland's lack of flagship research institution than its aspirations for one. I say this as a proud PSU grad ('06). Instead of closing ranks behind a great local school, Portland should welcome the addition of another visible educational partner in town.
3:18 p.m.
Mar 24, '09
Why are the collection of state-run, state-funded colleges and universities run as a competing organizations anyway? Beyond the revenue of the whole Ducks vs. Beavers thing, is there a reason not to run the whole thing as a single entity with many branches? That is already done in terms of the graduate programs--generally only 1 university will offer a Ph.D. in a given area so if you don't feel like uprooting yourself to the city that branch is in, your SOL. Given that level of collaboration, I've never quite understood the reason for the divisions between "U of State" and "State U." we have across the country. The current system seems pretty inefficient and more about protecting fiefs than building quality programs that maximize use of tax dollars. Roll them into one.
3:32 p.m.
Mar 24, '09
I generally agree with Kari. The U of O should stay in Eugene. And I find this kind of branding mildly offensive. But I am also not sentimental about the sign. It can go.
I also agree with Ted Wheeler. We need all the component institutions of the Oregon University System to pull together.
But, that said, I think all of Oregon’s higher ed system is under strain. Holding together the current model of teaching, research and sports is getting more difficult. Our universities have presidents that make much more than our governor, and coaches that make much more than those university presidents. While on the teaching side, costs and tuition continue to go up, as online competitors, such as the Israeli entrepreneur Shai Reshef’s tuition free (but not credit/test free) global university, create much more cost effective alternatives. Why doesn’t Oregon pay for our students’ education at Reshef’s global internet university and save lots of money. Just what more are we paying for?
As one blogger wrote (here), the current costs of higher ed, like housing, may just be a bubble:
“For example, costs for collegiate education have increased 4.39 times faster than inflation over the past three decades and has now eclipsed affordability for most households (median incomes have stagnated during this same period) with no appreciable improvement in the quality of graduates. Worse, there is reason to believe that costs of higher education (direct costs and lost income) are now nearly equal (in net present value) to the additional lifetime income derived from having a degree. Since nearly all of the value of an education has been extracted by the producer, to the detriment of the customer, this situation has all the earmarks of a bubble.”
So, the sign controversy may just be the sad symptom of a deeper malaise. Branding will not save them.
4:06 p.m.
Mar 24, '09
This act fits the current personality of UofO. It has lost its way in recent years as far as I am concerned and does not seem concerned about how they fit into the community. Clearly they have the legal right to do what they want, but they will not win friends by what they are doing. I resented it when they sold the university to Phil Knight and this is just more of the same.
Mar 24, '09
"Made in Oregon," advertises an ethos that is very much Portland: buying local. "University of Oregon," is, historic Portland ties and new satellite notwithstanding, in Eugene.
It's entirely legitimate for the city to get its fingers in a sign as iconic, visible and important as this. And, honestly, it's stunning that the University of Oregon would even try to change the sign.
This is the latest example of UO's pitched battle with PSU. It's frustrating that it has to blow up in such a divisive and ugly way.
5:34 p.m.
Mar 24, '09
With due respect, Kari, to suggest that a billboard has any impact on the ability of PSU to become a world class University is absurd.
You know what would make PSU a world class university? A commitment by Oregon's legislature to make a world class investment in higher education, and a commensurate commitment by PSU alumni to do the same.
The fact that the city of Portland is even considering spending a half million in public money on a billboard with some public support from the chattering class is a pretty good indicator of just how detached both have become.
If the city happens to have a half million lying around, I'd much prefer they spend it on actual priorities, not thumbing their nose at a non-profit institution that has spent millions renovating a site that will be a tremendous boon to the local community in that part of downtown.
Besides, what could be more Oregon than the University of Oregon?
5:34 p.m.
Mar 24, '09
I can't believe I'm actually in a debate over a sign, but its kinda refreshing for a change. U of O is an Oregon institution, not a Eugene institution. Last I checked, Portland was in Oregon.
Well, sort of.
I have a great idea though. The first University to become a world class research university in Portland gets the sign.
PS - if you want to debate a sign, how about the old Waddles sign. That was an Oregon institution, at the gateway to the state no less. Now its selling owls or some such.
Or we could debate strange signs - how about the one along the road to the coast that advertises "Staley's." There's nothing there, but the sign is always lit.
Mar 24, '09
The comparison with the University of Washington in Seattle is apt. UW is generally considered to be the top research university in the Northwestern United States; the University of Oregon lags far behind by common metrics.
I think that a certain amount of this difference (a significant amount) is simply due to choices made around location. The University of Washington is situated in the largest city in the state of Washington. Beside the obvious synergies with business and other research institutions, Ph.D. students can reasonably decide to spend four or five years in a large city because they can find other employment opportunities and publishing opportunities there. Such is certainly not the case with Eugene, a charming college town, but not one with the opportunities of a Seattle or even Portland.
It is not coincidence that major research universities are commonly located in or near major metropolitan centers.
Because so much of our state power structure has loyalty to the U. of Oregon (or Oregon State), there have been continuing efforts to throttle Portland State precisely because Portland State is so obviously the place where higher education dollars would do the most good for the greatest number, ceteris paribus.
This is why Kari is right. (I can't believe I'm on here agreeing with Kari! Everyone buy a lottery ticket!) The University of Oregon is trying to buy a large landmark to signify that this is not PSU's town. Well, it is. And the University of Oregon ought to be ashamed of its past efforts at keeping PSU a "child" in the family and its present efforts to colonize Portland.
5:41 p.m.
Mar 24, '09
PS - in the name of intellectual honesty, here's my original post, in full:
I don't have a problem with the sign referring to a statewide institution especially if it is one that has helped shape our community (any more than I would mind if it advertised Columbia Sportswear, for example, or SOLV, both of which are headquartered outside of Portland).
Rather than debating a sign, however, I hope that we pull together with our higher education leaders and help them leverage PSU, OHSU, PCC and other institutions into a world class educational system that could truly drive economic development and job creation in Portland. Think UW and what it has done for Seattle...
Mar 24, '09
My generalizations as a transplant Oregonian:
-We're talking about a big neon ad, right? Is it historic because it stood somewhere on that rooftop long enough, or does it actually mean something?
-Every tenth car on any given road has that characteristic 'O', so I'm not sure if the U of O is having trouble with name recognition in the state.
6:35 p.m.
Mar 24, '09
In the spirit of compromise over this allegedly historic sign, I move that we replace "Made in" with "Blue." Everyone wins.
7:23 p.m.
Mar 24, '09
Joe Hill said:
"Because so much of our state power structure has loyalty to the U. of Oregon (or Oregon State), there have been continuing efforts to throttle Portland State precisely because Portland State is so obviously the place where higher education dollars would do the most good for the greatest number, ceteris paribus.
This is why Kari is right. (I can't believe I'm on here agreeing with Kari! Everyone buy a lottery ticket!) The University of Oregon is trying to buy a large landmark to signify that this is not PSU's town. Well, it is. And the University of Oregon ought to be ashamed of its past efforts at keeping PSU a "child" in the family and its present efforts to colonize Portland."
Well put Joe. And this is exactly why it's a done deal. No one in their right mind will challange UofO since they have the largest amount of money and power in the state in terms of the higher ed schools.
Personally I think the school should offer to lease the sign to Made in Oregon for ten years and then bill them monthly for electricity. Wouldn't that actually be revenue that could be used for other purposes? But then again, we are talking about what's reasonable. Stupid me!
Mar 24, '09
Mr Wheeler's right, you can build as many signs or monuments as you want - makes no difference.
Our branding houdl be good schools, roads and wuality of life. Relying on something as tranistory as a sign or floating sidewalk only encourages more waste by monument building - not even a soccer stadium makes a difference.
Though I do think a beer fountain would be great and world-class.
Mar 24, '09
The University of Oregon owns the building so they should decide what the sign says.
No one will reject PSU because a U of O sign exists. Better that local efforts were spent helping PSU create success then fighting over a sign. If people think the key to being a good University is a sign then build a bigger one on top of a PSU owned building.
Mar 24, '09
To answer Joel's question, yes, OGI is part of OHSU.
10:43 p.m.
Mar 24, '09
Kari, I have posted previously about how desperate Portland is in need of a world class research university. What are we, the only city in the top 25? top 50? without one?
Contrary to what Mayor Adams claims, soccer is not what is going to get us on the international map, it's economic development, intellectual contributions, and educational institutions. Soccer and AAA baseball are nice icing, but they ain't the cake.
But I have to disagree with you on the sign. What has hindered PSU is a decades long unwillingness by the Legislature to face up to the mistake of situating two land grant universities far outside of the major population center. And given the budget in this state, we'll never be able to grow PSU if and unless we take some resources from OSU and U of O. I'm not holding my breath.
Previous attempts to merge OHSU and PSU have been completely rebuffed. And other than the Hatfield School, I just don't see a lot of action down at PSU. Their faculty are paid abysmally--full professors make in the 70s. The teaching load is high. And a lot of the faculty are committed to the community / adult education model. I don't know if Wiewel can change this or not. They need LOTS of money and this is a bad time to raise it.
But back to the sign. Maybe the sign is exactly what PSU needs to shake itself out of its doldrums. Maybe they need some competition from the big bully down South. Maybe they need to see what top flight research universities look like.
Maybe the sign is EXACTLY what PSU needs.
Mar 24, '09
Is PSU, (along with OHSU, the City, and the State) willing to do what is necessary to be the University we need? --Research dollars --Student selectivity --Uniting with OHSU --Recruitment of top professors --Major private funding commitments --Major public financing
If we kill the UofO sign on the grounds of PSU gains (actually a pretty good argument), it'd be good for there to be strong indications of the commitment necessary to make PSU the national-class University we need.
Mar 25, '09
To make the sign a better fit for everybody and possibly less controversy; why not change the sign to read simply "Oregon"? After all the duck logo has been replaced by a big "O" and the university is often called "Oregon" rather than the University of Oregon.
Mar 25, '09
Full Disclosure: Location: Eugene Graduate of University of Oregon School of Law
I like the made in Oregon sign but, a couple of people hit it--whoever owns the sign can do with it what they please.
Quit your hand wringing over such a trivial issue, it's embarrassing.
For examples of important issues worth focusing attention on please see: Iraq War, global warming, clean energy, Columbia River bi-op litigation, global recession, Hanford . . . the list goes on.
Mar 25, '09
I agree with Terry Parker -- if we must change the sign why not let it just say "Oregon" U of O can say it means them and those of us who think it stands for something more like the Oregon way, can have that interpretation.
Personally I wouldn't change it at all -- it is associated with Portland's skyline in all kinds of places. People remember it and they like it so why get rid of it.
Mar 25, '09
A bit contrary to my thoughts
Randy Leonard
Mar 25, '09
A bit contrary to my thoughts
Randy Leonard
1:45 p.m.
Mar 25, '09
We're talking about a big neon ad, right? Is it historic because it stood somewhere on that rooftop long enough, or does it actually mean something?
To be clear, I don't give a damn about whether it's "historic" or not. I'd think it was a problem if UO was proposing building a brand new sign just like it. UO is in Eugene. PSU is in Portland. 'Nuff said.
1:45 p.m.
Mar 25, '09
The University of Oregon owns the building so they should decide what the sign says.
No, they don't. They're renting it.
That said, Portland's rules have NEVER said, "If you own a building you can put whatever sign you want on it."
1:50 p.m.
Mar 25, '09
Paul G wrote:
I totally agree about what PSU really needs. In my view, the sign issue is a symbol of all that is wrong with how we've treated PSU in this state.
PSU doesn't need the sign. I'd amend your closing thought with this: Maybe the fight over the sign is EXACTLY what PSU needs.
It's a fight worth fighting. Because symbols and branding matter. "Serious" people like to pretend otherwise - but symbols tell stories and communicate our self-image to the outside world.
Is Portland a city that's prouder of the University of Oregon than it is of Portland State University? If we are, we'll never have a world-class university here.
1:53 p.m.
Mar 25, '09
"No, they don't. They're renting it."
And they're paying to keep it lit. If they can't change the content of the billboard, it will simply go dark.
And the fact that UO is leasing a large building in downtown Portland suggests that UO in fact is in Portland, no?
Mar 25, '09
Portland State has a LOOOOOOOONG way to go in order to become a Research One school. A neon sign advertising another university would be the least of its challenges.
Mar 25, '09
"Quit your hand wringing over such a trivial issue, it's embarrassing." OnemuleTeam
'Trivial'? Not at all. Trivial, would be controversy wrought over a small sign in an inconspicuous location. The White Stag/Made in Oregon sign happens to be a huge sign located prominently so its message inescapably places itself on the consciousness of hundreds of thousands of people every day. This is power that's fairly easy to understand. It's also fairly easy to understand why an opportunity to exert such power appeals to U of O.
At this point, I'd almost just as soon the sign were taken entirely down rather than see U of O's name on it. I'd miss the deer becoming Rudolf at Christmas time but other than that, there's enough 'in the public's face' commercial advertising going on already.
3:32 p.m.
Mar 25, '09
ah, should have added that while Portland has not said you can put any sign up that you want, that's an irrelevant dodge--because the issue is over content. The historical designation protects the sign's design integrity, but Council has stated the opposite of what Kari is trying to imply--they will NOT attempt to dictate what the sign says, as a matter of content. What they can do is buy it and maintain it themselves, which is what Randy is proposing.
9:52 a.m.
Mar 26, '09
Kari writes: UO is in Eugene. PSU is in Portland. 'Nuff said.
This is precisely the sort of inward looking attitudes that have hampered Oregon, and PSU, for decades (and actually hurts many public education systems).
For better or for worse, U of O is the flagship university in the Oregon system, and has the highest visibility nationally and internationally (sorry OSU boosters).
We may decide that we need a third R1 in this state and the target would certainly be PSU. But we may also decide to leverage the U of O name and establish satellite locations in Portland, and keep PSU primarily functioning as it does now. We may even wish to broker a forced marriage between the two on some programs.
These choices should be determined by what is in the long run interests of the WHOLE state of Oregon and its citizens.
10:08 a.m.
Mar 26, '09
By the way, I don't mean to be an Oregon basher, but no one should kid themselves about where are colleges and universities rank nationally.
Kiplinger's "Best value" in publics: UO 88th in state, 93rd out; OSU not ranked in top 100.
US News: UO 108th, OSU simply described as "third tier"
We have no business program ranked in the top 100. U of O's law school is ranked 82. OSU's engineering school is ranked 82nd.
Nor do we have privates taking up the slack. Reed is the highest rank private, and it is usually placed in the top 50 or so Lewis and Clark and U of Portland are ranked in the top 50. Lewis and Clark has a top 75 Law school, and is in the top 5 in environmental law.
Compare these to what you might call our "competitors": Washington, Texas (Austin), North Carolina, Colorado, Utah. I'm just guessing here, but I suspect the only state with similarly poor higher education rankings is Utah.
10:11 a.m.
Mar 26, '09
Sorry for multiple postings..last word.. in that list above, I should add that WA, NC, CO, TX all have one or more world class research universities in the state (that is, they're not just not as bad as us, they've all managed to build one or more top 20 institutions).
We were on a track to go there with U of O thirty years ago, but we have lagged badly in the past two decades.
Mar 26, '09
There's a Facebook page, titled "Save the Made in Oregon sign" with over 20,000 people signed up. The proposed change to "University of Oregon" is a big deal. Most of the people I talk to feel that Made in Oregon has become a city icon, projecting pride in the city and anything manufactured in the state. Oprah Magazine (May 2008) had an article on Portland and featured a picture of the sign and stated "Erected in 1940 to advertise a sugar company, it has become a local landmark for a city that is proud of its roots and like to find new uses for old things. Also, the Trailblazers pregame show runs a clip with a picture of the sign, projecting pride in our team. Travel Portland Magazine (Sept 2007) featured an article on Portland restaurants with a picture of the Made in Oregon sign as the lead off for the article. You also see the sign in Portland coffee table books, Christmas cards, Portland Monthly Magazine (February 2009), calendars, Architectural Guidebooks, The Portland Spectator (January 2009), and on and on.
The sign has become iconic, identified with Portland, much like the Golden Gate Bridge, the Space Needle, or the Hollywood sign. Plus it has marketing value to our State Economic Development Department and our City of Portland business recruiting efforts. It has marketing value to our restaurants, breweries, nurseries, high tech industry, agriculture, and any other manufacturing industry in Oregon.
If it was a regular sign, I wouldn't object to the change. But the sign is, in fact, in violation of the City's sign ordinances and only exists because it has been designated a historic landmark. Since the last change to the sign for Made in Oregon, the sign's identity with Portland has been strengthened and should not be lost to advertise a school based in Eugene.
As for branding, someone at UO failed Marketing 101. When an outsider looks at the sign, they'll say "Did the UO change their mascot?" or, "Are the two UOs?"
10:58 a.m.
Mar 29, '09
Why don't we change the copy on the sign to:
"Cesar Chavez"
This could save all of us a lot of keystrokes, and would save the city and it's merchants hundreds of thousands of dollars otherwise spent on rebranding some strip of asphalt.
Mar 29, '09
Really, folks, isn't this really about UofO vs Portland State? That is what I get from the posts. Come on now. Isn't that petty provincial and divisive?
"Made in Oregon" has become as iconic for Portland's downtown skyline as Seattle's Pike Place Market is there.
1:15 a.m.
Mar 30, '09
No, this really is not about PSUvUoO. This is about cleaning up a statutory "sticky wicket." You've got state and local ordinances that regulate where, and how big commercial signage may be. You have a historic landmark that has been granted regulated change in the "what" of the sign - "White Stag" to "Made in Oregon." The combination of laws restricting the placement and size of outdoor commercial advertising with the administratively adjudicated issues of freedom of speech by the sign/property owner bring us to debate we are having now. The sign is a historic landmark that should no longer be a private gain on the public dime. That public dime is all of us...our city, our community, and the value of what we all bring to each other whether financial, social, or philosophical/spiritual. This is the only sign of its kind that is allowed to exist within our downtown skyline. It was a mistake to relegate the sign to this fate and we should fix it.
1:49 a.m.
Mar 30, '09
It's a sign that's readily visible to visitors as they arrive downtown from the airport or via I-84 and I-5.
Not to mention I-205.
The sign is prominent in many articles, videos, etc. about Portland and Oregon. As has been said before, it's shown in just about any Blazers home game when on tv. It wasn't for some time after I moved to Oregon that I found out that it was for a business, not just a sign advertising Oregon. To me, it's stood for Oregon pride and investing in Oregon.
I'd really rather not see the sign changed.
Apr 1, '09
Leonard wants to spend a bundle on a sign? A better idea would be using that money on PSU research. I am unimpressed with his spending priorities.
Apr 2, '09
Paul g"For better or for worse, U of O is the flagship university in the Oregon system"
Sorry Paul, but according to the Oregon University System website, PSU passed UofO by as the largest University back in 1999 and by 2013 it is projected that PSU will outstrip UofO's registration numbers by 7,000 students. Even OSU has more students than UofO.
Check here for the stats: http://www.ous.edu/factreport/enroll/files/enrdmnd.pdf http://www.ous.edu/dept/ir/reports/er2008/index.php
If PSU wanted to come down to Eugene and establish a campus and change the largest sign in Eugene to read PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY I bet we'd be hearing about it.
10:49 a.m.
Apr 2, '09
"The sign is a historic landmark that should no longer be a private gain on the public dime."
When was it on the public dime? Or if you consider UO to be public, which you probably should---how would it be private gain?
And I don't think "most students" is what Paul meant by "flagship." UO is clearly the flagship university of the state.
Apr 5, '09
I think also what is important here, especially for us natives, is that that sign has a lot of tradition and history and has always helped define our city.
For those who don't know, it originally was for Whitestag, an old Oregon brand...and I think most importantly, it has ALWAYS transformed into Rudolph at least for the last 45 Christmas' I can remember. There is something wonderful about pointing it out to my children, while remembering how my brother, sister and I use to compete to see who could spot Rudolph first on our trips inot the city.
<h2>The transition to Made in Oregon, was a welcome one. It made the sign something we all could own and be proud of. The universality of it...should be reason enough to keep the status quo.</h2>