You may have heard that federal officials are cracking down on highway humor. Signs like “Seat belts are in, everybody’s wearing them” and “Don’t be a grinch, let them merge” are to be phased out by 2026.
According to guidance within the newly updated Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, an encyclopedic tome covering road signage and markings, messages that are witty or refer to pop culture should be avoided because they can be “misunderstood or understood by only a limited segment of road users.” The move has triggered grumbling that the U.S. Department of Transportation is being a killjoy and—more worryingly—that it is prohibiting a critical tool used to spread the Good News about safe driving.
“These signs have been incredibly popular with drivers, and are an important tool for engaging the public in traffic safety awareness,” Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, said in a statement to KPNX in Phoenix. “We hope the federal government reconsiders and allows the fun and informative phrases to continue on Arizona’s highway message signs.” Texas DOT also struck a defiant note, telling the Austin American-Statesman that “Our message board signs along Texas highways are a great tool to show important safety information to drivers.”
Notably, neither state’s officials shared evidence that their “fun and informative phrases” actually do anything to reduce crashes. Although state transportation agencies put resources into quests for traffic puns, research suggests that their efforts are pointless. The federal recommendation against witty messaging boards—it’s not an outright ban—is overdue and welcome. In fact, it doesn’t go far enough.
I have spent a lot of time thinking about American traffic safety messaging. The history of these campaigns includes flyers distributed to pedestrians a century ago to discourage jaywalking (a “crime” created to ensure cars could move quickly through cities) and driving education videos created in the 1950s. Today’s road safety efforts often involve CMS—changeable message signs—installed alongside or above highways, displaying a basic textual message like “Please drive carefully,” or a more creative one like “Slow Down. This ain’t Thunder Road” (in New Jersey, naturally).
Researchers have found that traffic safety messaging can shift drivers’ behavior only when targeted toward an audience that is both receptive and unfamiliar with the information being conveyed. For example, experts credit traffic safety PSAs for helping to spur the rapid adoption of child car seats in the 1970s. The message “car seats will keep your child safe” was a new one for many parents, as car seats designed for safety (versus general restraining of children) were still catching on. Parents, in turn, were highly motivated to protect their children and be seen as responsible guardians within their communities. Car seat usage is now over 90 percent.
Contemporary traffic safety messaging that is focused on familiar problems like distracted driving is far less likely to do anything. Everyone knows they should wear a seat belt, respect speed limits, and avoid texting while they drive. People who break such rules do so not because they are ignorant of them, but because they have chosen to nonetheless take a risk. Messages like “Get your head out of your apps” don’t provide new information, so they won’t prevent most text-happy drivers from reaching for their phone. Yes, really: The federal bible of traffic safety tactics, known as Countermeasures That Work, gives the lowest possible rating to education campaigns about distracted driving. “Communications and outreach alone are not a recommended approach to address distracted driving,” reads the report’s latest edition. Awareness campaigns intended to enhance the safety of pedestrians and older drivers by reminding people to stay focused on the road were found to be similarly ineffective.
And there is no reason to think that zhuzhing up familiar messages with rhymes or humor makes them more likely to deter bad driving. “Being snappy for being snappy—we don’t see any evidence that can change behavior,” Jessica Cicchino, the vice president of research at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, has told me previously.
Nevertheless, many state DOT staff believe they are providing a crucial public service with these safety slogans. As an Iowa DOT traffic engineer told USA Today in 2015, “We’re not doing it to get a chuckle. … We’re trying to change people’s behavior.”
There are far more effective ways to pursue that goal than devising any kind of safety slogan, humorous or not. For instance, research has shown that installing automatic traffic cameras can dramatically reduce collisions. Vehicle technology known as Intelligent Speed Assist can prevent drivers from blasting past speed limits. “Road diets” that narrow urban traffic lanes will enhance safety by naturally slowing down motor vehicles. Even a simple step like letting cities lower speed limits on their own streets could save many lives. The dollars and staff-hours invested in traffic safety messages would be better spent elsewhere.
There is just one big problem with those tactics: Drivers don’t like them. The same reason they work—by forcing a change in behavior, rather than merely suggesting it—is the same reason they are so hard to implement. Funny highway messages may not accomplish anything, but they do have the benefit of being unobjectionable. State politicians and transportation agencies understand that.
Much of the funding for highway messaging campaigns comes from the federal DOT, which has historically given states wide latitude in their road-safety spending decisions. That’s why many state officials were taken aback by the new federal guidance against humorous signage: Despite an ongoing epidemic of American crash deaths, state transportation departments have grown comfortable with the auto-centric status quo, especially since they are seldom held accountable for the efficacy of their safety programs. The funny signs might not have worked, but they allowed DOT staff to look like they were doing something meaningful to address the problem.
The U.S. DOT and Congress should go further, discouraging not just pointless message campaigns, but all kinds of ridiculous safety efforts. In recent years state DOTs have funded a litany of weird, wasteful projects including a pedestrian safety fashion show in Georgia, staffers wearing giant human eyeballs in Denver, and TV ads in South Dakota featuring a character called “Jim Reaper.” That last one even earned the state transportation department an award from the national association of highway safety agencies. With a crash death rate far above those of other rich nations, the U.S. cannot afford to allocate scarce resources toward programs that amount to little more than vibes. Yes, without the humorous traffic slogans our highways may be a little less “fun.” That’s good. They should be.
