It is widely accepted that work needs to be done on the historical square, but work costs money and the funds need to be raised somewhere, so why should the buildings themselves not generate the money? No one is harmed by billboards, no one is left out of pocket. Everyone benefits. In July 1902, the bell tower of St Mark's Basilica began to crack. It then collapsed(1) so the work is needed to avoid a similar catastrophe. In comparison, the billboards are only a small inconvenience.

(1)http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/01/italy.architecture?gusrc=rss&feed=artanddesign

Venice is a major tourist destination because of its beauty; the architecture and the atmosphere that this creates. To destroy this by turning it into another Times Square would surely have a negative impact on the tourist trade which brings so much money into the city.

The five billboards, proposed to be 250 square meters in length are only temporary whilst the work is going on. It is estimated that it will be 6 year restoration project(1). This is a temporary measure to solve a long term problem. (1) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/2656086/Venice-plans-electronic-billboards-in-St-Marks-Square.html

THIS WILL ONLY BE 1 BILLBOARD OF 250M2 NOT 5 BILLBOARDS AS REPORTED

PEOPLE WILL NOT STOP GOING TO VENICE BECAUSE 1 BUILDING HAS AN ADVERT ON THE SCAFFOLD DURING RESTORATION. BY GOIN GTO VENICE THEY ARE CREATING THE AUDIENCE THAT THE ADVERTISING NEEDS THEREFORE HELPING RESTORE AND IMPROVE VENICE FOR FUTRE GENERATIONS

If potential tourists know that one of Venice's principle tourist attractions is to be masked by unattractive billboards, they are likely to postpone their trip until St Mark's Square is restored, especially if they are coming from far away. They want to see Venice at its best. If the tourist trade is thus depressed for six years (assuming that the project does not overrun) this could have a significant economic impact.

The mayor of Venice, Massimo Cacciari, has promised to approve of the advertisements to be placed on the flashing billboards. This means that there will be nothing controversial placed on the screens. This shows that the Mayor is willing to put work into the billboards rather than just slapping them up and seeing what happens.

Even if the more lurid advertising images are avoided, giant flashing billboards against the backdrop of a beautiful Renaissance city is always going to be 'a clash of taste.' If the Mayor is willing to put such a degree of thought into the project, he should use it to find an alternative source of revenue.

People are arguing that the billboards will look ugly, but during the restoration works, scaffolding will need to be constructed around the buildings anyway. At least the billboards will add some colour to the grey beams around the building. Once again, we are coming across the thought that proportionally, the idea of billboards is actually a sound investment.

Scaffolding may not be very attractive, but at least it doesn't stand out as an eyesore, unlike flashing bilboards which will intrude into any attempts at appreciating your surroundings.

The reason the buildings in St. Mark’s square need restoration is partly the fault of tourists and locals. One reason is natural aging of the building, obviously this cannot be attributed to anyone. However, pollution and mass tourism are also to blame. Seen as locals and tourists helped bring the buildings into a declined state, how can they complain when measures are taken to restore the buildings?

Venice has many romantic locations; Piazza San Marco is not the only place of beauty in the city. Venice will still retain its charm. Furthermore, the juxtaposition of modern billboards and ancient architecture need not be an unattractive one; many cities are a mixture of old and new and this is part of their character and beauty.

Anyway, surely it is better that the billboards supposedly 'ruin' the view for a few years, and the money preserves it for decades to come, than to just let the square crumble into the lagoon.

Venice, often viewed as a romantic setting. People go to Venice to absorb the reputation of the city, to be wooed by the eloquence of the buildings. To destroy this is to destroy the heart of the city and its tourism. The buildings contained within the square are some of the most famous and historic in Italy. To put billboards up will only ruin the setting and make the square feel uncomfortable.

The beauty of Venice should be open to be appreciated by all, not charged for. Neither should the citizens of Venice have to stump up funds they can probably ill afford for their historic buildings. Why shouldn't the buildings effectively pay for themselves, by exploiting their prime location for advertising space? Venice is historic, yes, but it is also a modern city that has to sustain itself in a modern economy.

Rather than blasting images across flashing billboards to earn money for the restoration, why can there not be a tax imposed, or a fee which tourists have to pay. The city council of Venice is being lazy by not thinking of more compatible ideas that complement rather than hinder the city and its history.

There are existing laws which surround St Mark’s square, and others. The council will have to deliberately defy this law in order to put the billboards up. If the council find it so easy to defy this law, how do we know thy will not defy other laws? To make a loophole in the legal system for council’s own purposes renders the whole legal system and the trust around it unstable.

The Mayor of Venice’s plans have been met with fierce criticism regarding the actual motives behind the scheme. Philippe Daverio, a leading art critic, said: "It is a perverse plan - they will prolong the works just so they can profit from the advertising screens.”(1) The Mayor has not promised that all the money will go towards the restoration, so the door remains open for the billboards to remain on the buildings for a longer period than anticipated. Once these boards are up, and the dollar sign is in councilors’ eyes, it will be much harder to campaign for the boards to be dismantled.

(1) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/2656086/Venice-plans-electronic-billboards-in-St-Marks-Square.html