A new ad for Microsoft Office claims a computer that doesn’t use their software, “is like Los Angeles without Santa Monica Pier.” Besides being a really poor metaphor – you’d think Microsoft could think of a more essential asset than the pier to compare their product to, such as the freeway – the ad also seemed to bring up an constant debate among Metblogs readers and writers: should any area outside of the City of Los Angeles be referred to as L.A.?
When I think Los Angeles, my mind is on anything within county limits. The Los Angeles of popular fiction and of the national mindset never bothers to take into account the borders of the 88 different cities of Los Angeles County, including Beverly Hills, West Hollywood, and Santa Monica.
Street sign colors may change, certain parking restrictions may be different, real estate taxes may fluctuate, but there’s little practical reason to distinguish between what is the City of Los Angeles and what happens to be another city, or incorporated part of, Los Angeles. As in County.
Except for the City of Long Beach, which really should be annexed into Orange County. Really, please, take it. But I digress…
What say you, Angelenos (county folk, city folk, all!) – is there any value in having city pride instead of boldly claiming stake as a member of the great metropolis called Los Angeles?