Drive through any major intersection in London and you can’t miss them: Election signs clustered on the corner, bright blue, orange and red signs screaming out the names of local candidates.
To Gina Barber, manager for London West NDP candidate Peter Ferguson, there are more signs this election.
“It’s become an eyesore. They are no longer informative, they are just ugly,” she said, adding when one sign goes up at an intersection, others arrive and soon there’s a mini-turf war. While name recognition is important, Barber says there’s no need to have a dozen signs at an intersection.
Dave Dillon, campaign manager for London Fanshawe Conservative candidate Jim Chahbar, said it’s all about name recognition so voters know who the candidate is, adding there’s a bit of one-upmanship from eager volunteers who want to ensure their candidate gets plenty of exposure.
“Sometimes it means having more signs or getting a better intersection, or getting there first and getting the prime spot,” he said.
But do signs work?
Mike Ashton, manager for London North Centre Liberal incumbent Glen Pearson, said it’s a problem if candidates don’t have signs up and voters won’t know who they are.
“Some people figure the more signs, the bigger the campaign and the more important the candidate. I don’t know whether that’s true or not,” Ashton said. “I think there are some voters that make decisions based on signs, but there more voters who make decisions based on the candidates.”
