Hey London, how do you feel about a major span across the Thames being corporately sponsored? Because that's what's going to happen with the Garden Bridge.
It's just been announced that Sky, the media behemoth owned by Rupert Murdoch, has given an undisclosed amount to the Garden Bridge Trust. But this is no altruistic gesture: one of the gardens on the bridge "will be named by Sky".
There is a growing list of concerns about what's billed by some as London's biggest vanity project: the bridge won't be open between midnight and 6am, and will be closed several days a year for fundraising parties. People will have to queue at busy times. Projected 'visitor numbers' suggest the already busy South Bank will be further clogged up. A lot of public money has been poured into it. Those on the bridge will be tracked by their mobile phones.
And now it's going to be named after the people who brought you Got To Dance.
The Garden Bridge Trust London’s maintains the bridge will be "a stunning new public garden and pedestrian crossing", creating a "vital link" between north and south London.
What are your thoughts: should Sky get dibs on naming part of a bridge partially funded by the public? Was it a joke to think that the Garden Bridge was ever a genuinely 'public space'?