This may be one of the silliest things I’ve ever blogged about. Photos of Gilles Villeneuve, displayed on Crescent Street during the Grand Prix, have involved the Gilles Villeneuve Museum in a $2,000 fine for breaking laws on tobacco advertising because Villeneuve had the word Marlboro on some of his kit on the cusp of the 1980s – long before the ban on tobacco advertising in sport.
Our taxes are being spent on inspectors who can’t understand a cultural context, think the sight of a logo in a vintage photo poses a risk, and find it fair and just to fine a museum – a museum – for displaying interesting and relevant historical images. Are they supposed to keep the images under wraps now? Photoshop out the offending logo?
If I had to defend the museum I’d simply say the logo wasn’t advertising. Advertising is paid for. The museum was, I presume, not receiving payment from Marlboro. Q.E.D.