TommyC80

It is still in poor taste and even more poorly thought out. Maybe if you lost a loved one in those towers you'd think differently about it...

fastair

It really isn't in poor taste at all, there are people who are attempting to link two separate events based on a proximity (how far does that proximity extend? The mosque was a few blocks away, and that made the news for weeks) and a manipulation of words ("land" in no way implies "crash into" in any normal person's vocabulary unlesss one is looking to find a fault and stretch a point.)

As to what I personally (or anyone else here) did or did not go through, lost, or did not lose, how would you know? I come from an extended family whose 4 closest relatives are all UA employees and have been for their entire careers. For you to assume that since I have coped well, that I knew noone that lost is taking liberties that are not based on any sound assumptions. Because I don't look for negative hidden meanings in everything for an event that is in the past shows my healthy copeing skills and an ability to not let one event a decade ago dictate the course of the rest of my life.

Words can be interpreted many ways, but the one who determines how they perceive them is not the sender of the words, but rather the one who receives them. How they choose to process them tells far more about them than about the original intent of the message sender, especially when the words are twisted and the location's proximity is different (and most likely not determined by the one who put the pen to paper.)

FCO_SFO

An article on the ad placement is now linked on the Drudgereport, so any hopes that UACO had that this would simply fade away are pretty well dashed.

violist

How clueless. Simply appalling.

fastair

Enough of the insults. I am far less clueless than you would take me to be, your knowledge of what clues I have and the other person's assumptions that I knew noone impact negativly are what is clueless. To assume one knows another person and their individual story when not posted by them 1st hand is in poor taste. It is DIRECTLY in poor taste, and does not require manipulation of words to conjure images, it is a conclusion without facts to support it. Assuming a person is clueless is appalling, when you know nothing about them.

Think bigger than small, assume the best in people not the worst. Looking for evil where evil does not exist is much sadder than looking at something as written as well as the most likely methods as to how it got written there, instead of assuming it was done with some twisted mailcious intent. Malice lies in those that assume it. Evil people assume evil conspiracies, good people assume the best. Hitler saw far more evil plots and subtrfuge than Mother Theresa. Paranoia and fear are coping tools of the weak and sick, while adaptation and recovery are methods of the strong and healthy minds.

Am I to interpret that you believe that there is a peron at UA/CO that purposely thought of that phrase as something other than what is written, and that they told whoever manages the billboards to place it as close to a tragedy on purpose? I don't think many hear beliefe that, so if the intent wasn't there, the thought never crossed their minds, what does that say about those whose minds it does cross?

UALsandiego

I have noticed a very aggressive ad campaign war between UA and AA in NYC.
At least it was that way 2 weeks ago.
Now I do not believe, obviously, that this was intentional. Indeed, I didn't even notice it there until I saw this thread. But yes, they should probably take that down rather quickly and replace it with one of the others.

GUWonder

DL, UA and AA are definitely running up ads across the city.

I have been by this sign there too and I didn't care to associate it with planes "landing" into buildings. No one in a proper state of mind likes it when planes "land" into buildings.

Sometimes "[t]here is no right or wrong only thinking makes it so" -- this may be one of those situations.

joshwex90

I did not lose my father on 9/11 (thank God,) but he just made it out of Building 7. He walks there every day, and I asked him about it. "Poor choice of a place to put it, but not even close to the level of reinstating the flight numbers."

I agree. Not the best. But certainly not the end of the world. And certainly not the fault of Smisek, or any other corporate management at CO, UA, United Continental Holdings...

I've also noticed this intense campaign war, but I primarily see it with DL and UA/CO. AA to a lesser extent

GUWonder

When it comes to responsibility for advertising, the buck starts and stops with the management of the company whose ads were legitimately run on behalf of the marketed company. Everything else is a cop-out of some sort.

In this case, I don't see what the big deal is. To "land" is not the same thing as to "crash". Even "crash-landing" is called a "crash-landing" because it is distinct from an ordinary landing.

About the flight numbers, that seems like sparking something for nothing. I doubt that even most of those who worked in WTC twin towers know the flight numbers of all the planes commandeered and crashed on September 11, 2001.

drexmacc

Some people read into things too much.

Shareholder

Are you expecting senior managers in Chicago to micromanage to the point of every ad sign posted across the USA?! Get real. Yes, this is an inappropriate location and if advised, then UA should certainly do the right thing and instruct their agency to remove that particular location and any others within site of the WTC. I was down there last weekend and didn't notice this or any other such sign.

But I suggest that if he hasn't already done so, to forward the details to Chicago for action.

sinoflyer

In this country, people are free to be offended. But in this case, get a life!

channa

Exactly. And while all companies should be held to a high standard, the new UA should be held to an even higher standard.

After all, they continuously remind us that they have the "finest people in the business." I can think of no other company that tells me something like that each time I use their product or service.

sinoflyer

CO and DL had been running tit-for-tat ads against each other in N.Y. for many years. Some of the stuff was downright nasty and insulting. I never liked CO's one-liner style. I long for Fallon's quirky artwork; it is so much classier. But I don't know, maybe to win in New York an ad has to be in-your-face?

joshwex90

The famous line that I remember seeing everywhere for DL was "Bigger isn't always better." Which clearly was opposed to UA/CO's "Bigger is better." The AA one is "The only U.S. carrier with First class and Business class on all flights to London." Thought that was an interesting take