Summary in Plain Language
The whole incident started quite simply: right after the 2026 Shanghai Book Fair, the entire exterior of the "Old China-Soviet Friendship Building" at the Shanghai Exhibition Center—this historic structure built in 1955 and considered a national treasure in the field of architecture—was covered with blue advertising banners printed with event information. While the banners were noticeable from a distance, they completely obscured the building’s distinctive spire, carvings, and classic proportions, which sparked a lot of backlash among netizens.
This article doesn’t get entangled in debates about whether the blue banners are aesthetically pleasing or not. Instead, it delves into a broader issue that people often overlook: the numerous signs, wayfinding indicators, event posters, and brand advertisements that are added to buildings. Essentially, these are “extra visual elements.” How much of these elements should be allowed to be visible? The article discusses how this has evolved over time, from a period when domestic buildings lacked proper signage to a current era where signs in tourist areas and commercial streets outshine the buildings themselves. It also looks at practices in cities like Paris, Kyoto, Hong Kong, and Las Vegas, and concludes that this is not just an aesthetic issue but a matter of who has the right to use the public visual space. Brands need to be visible, events need to attract visitors, old buildings need to preserve their historical significance, and ordinary pedestrians have the right to navigate the streets without being overwhelmed by overwhelming information. The real question is how to balance all these interests.
---
Five Dimensions of the Issue Explained in Simple Terms
1. The “blue banner controversy” is not about aesthetics
In the past, people’s understanding of signage was quite straightforward: it was simply a tool to guide people and indicate where something was. But now, its role has changed significantly. Signages need to help people find their way, look good for photos shared on social media, and catch people’s attention from hundreds of meters away. They have gone from being auxiliary tools to becoming the main focus of attention. The controversy erupted because the building in question is a city landmark that Shanghai residents have been familiar with for nearly 70 years; its spire and carvings are deeply ingrained in the city’s memory. It’s like putting a jacket covered with food delivery advertisements on a famous artist in a high-end dress—revealing a long-hidden contradiction: can signs truly overshadow the building’s original beauty?
2. The evolution of urban signage
The development of signage in China has gone to extremes. In the early days, public buildings had almost no signage, and it could take half an hour to find an entrance to a venue. As commerce grew, people realized that larger signs attracted more attention. This has led to a situation where signage has become a competitive element, with each party (business owners, event organizers, etc.) having its own demands. No one considers the overall visual experience of the street or the entire area; each sign seems reasonable on its own, but together, they create a chaotic and distracting environment.
3. How other cities manage signage
As early as the 1960s, the architectural community discussed this issue. In Las Vegas, huge neon signs along the streets were considered vulgar by mainstream architects. However, architect Venturi recognized the logic behind them: drivers passing by at high speeds could only see large, bright signs. But this approach doesn’t work in historic districts with pedestrians walking on foot. Cities like Paris, Kyoto, and Hong Kong have found balanced solutions:
- Paris has strict rules: signs in the old district can only be placed on the ground floor and must not cover walls on higher floors. Non-business signs must be turned off after 1 a.m. to avoid disturbing residents.
- In Kyoto, chain brands are allowed to use smaller logos in traditional buildings. This design won a local award for enhancing the historic atmosphere.
- Hong Kong’s neon signs, once seen as chaotic and unsafe, are now considered a unique part of the city’s heritage and are displayed in museums for visitors to see.
4. Smart solutions that avoid chaos
Many cities are now adopting more sophisticated approaches. For example, Sony Park in Tokyo’s Ginza has a pre-designed grid on its exterior, allowing for easy installation of event banners and artistic installations without damaging the building’s structure. The West Bund Dream Center in Shanghai divides its facade into areas for different types of signage, ensuring that each business maintains its own style. Shanghai’s Urban Planning and Development Institute provides clear guidelines for logo sizes and placement, allowing for a well-organized and visually pleasing environment.
5. It’s about visual sensitivity
The quality of the urban visual environment depends on the consensus formed by the general public. It’s not about which parties have the most money or the most power. When walking on the street, people should first see the buildings, trees, and sky, not overwhelming advertisements. Design exhibitions often involve activities that help people understand how different sizes of signs affect their experience. Only by balancing the interests of all parties can we avoid a situation where the first thing you see in a city landmark is advertising.
In summary, the “blue banner controversy” is a reflection of a broader issue about the use of public visual space and the need to find a balance between branding, historical preservation, and the needs of ordinary citizens.