Funny signs have prompted serious discussion lately.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHA) has put out a new edition of its Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The result isn’t a ban on funny signs (despite what early reports stated). But the FHA isn’t super thrilled about them, either.
You can look through the MUTCD yourself, but these are the key passages:
“Effective signs are legible to road users approaching them, and are readable and comprehensible in the viewing time provided to permit proper responses. Desired design characteristics include: (a) long visibility distances; (b) large lettering, symbols, and arrows; and (c) short legends.” (Section 2E.08)
“Guidance: When a CMS [changeable message sign] is used to display a traffic safety campaign, the message should be simple, direct, brief, legible, and clear…
“A CMS should not be used to display a traffic safety campaign message if doing so could adversely affect respect for the sign. Messages with obscure or secondary meanings, such as those with popular culture references, unconventional sign legend syntax, or that are intended to be humorous, should not be used as they might be misunderstood or understood only by a limited segment of road users and require greater time to process and understand. Similarly, slogan-type messages and the display of statistical information should not be used.” (2L.07)
Again, this is not a ban. But it is a culture clash with many state-based departments of transportation, which enjoy creative messaging. Arizona and Nevada even hold comedy contests for sign-writers.
So, is this federal overreach sucking all the joy out of life, or do the sourfaces have a point? You might expect me to side with sign-designers right away, since I’m “that wordplay guy.” But the truth is more complicated.
An unclear sign is worse than no sign at all, since it takes driver attention from the road and gives nothing of value back. For instance, the sign below is a no-littering sign referring to cigarette butts, but I find its message easy to miss or misunderstand. Funny? Sure. Effective? Ehhh… (The FHA agreed, reprimanding New Jersey over it.)
There’s a reason stop signs in the U.S. are generally red and octagonal, yield signs are triangular, and so on. Mix that up, and you create a version of the Stroop effect. The viewer could take a second or two longer to process a green stop sign—and sometimes that second or two can make more than 100 feet of difference.
Putting in extra words or unexpected words likewise adds to that processing time.
Unlike a stop sign, though, most changeable highway signs don’t call for an instant reaction from the driver. If you’re driving at a reasonable speed, you can mull over this message at your leisure. And even if you don’t know who Baby Yoda is, you can tell it’s pro-carseat.
When the situation does call for an immediate response, then the messages don’t mess around:
The real goal here should be safety, with amusement a tool or side benefit. Texas turned to a more humorous approach after mid-2010s data suggested its old signage—which emphasized highway death stats—seemed to increase the number of highway deaths. But that data doesn’t indicate funny signs are helpful, just that grim ones are unhelpful…and really, there isn’t enough data to draw any responsible conclusions.
Until that changes, I think it’s best that there’s some push and pull on sign design. Clever messages can command attention, but too clever loops back around to being dumb. Not every job is a venue for self-expression…but an artful writer can make a message memorable. On the road, as in communication, what matters most is getting where you need to go.