City Demands Murals Painted Over

I think this story is interesting.

I have a love-hate relationship with graffiti. While it is often a blight on historic buildings and in public spaces, there are times when it brightens up an otherwise sad-looking spot.

Most of the artists mentioned in the story seem happy to have had the chance to practice their skills legally in a public space. While I understand that it must be difficult for the city to police the area to make sure gang activity and offensive words and images are kept to a minimum, it seems kind of wrong to let them do their thing and then demand they destroy it.

I wonder why a communal art space isn't subject to the same amazing, natural checks and balances system evident in web 2.0 technology. Take Wikipedia for example. Incorrect information might be published, but it is only a matter of time before other users find and correct it. I would think that graffiti artists desperate for a legal place to display their art would keep fellow painters in check to ensure the longevity of the project.