"The Internet's Logo Snobs" Have Spoken

In business news this week, GAP Inc. introduced a new logo for the clothing company online and, due to vehement criticism from their fans and followers on Facebook and Twitter, quickly returned to their original logo. According to CNN's John D. Sutter, "the internet's logo snobs won this one." Interestingly, Gap had stated that they would "crowdsource" their new brand design, taking alternate suggestions from fans and implementing them if they were appropriate. Apparently, they have retracted this approach as well. A press release from the company states the following explanation: "We've learned a lot in this process. And we are clear that we did not go about this in the right way. We recognize that we missed the opportunity to engage with the online community. This wasn't the right project at the right time for crowd sourcing."

My favourite piece of commentary on this story comes from Margaret Lyons of Entertainment Weekly: "I get it. People hated the new logo. The little blue box just looked like dozens of other logos, we're all sans-serifed out, etc. But where is the Internet outcry about stirrup leggings? Or the lack of pockets on a jacket that should clearly have pockets? When will someone speak up about the terrifying reemergence of clogs?! Get your priorities in order, Internet. Those clogs are easily 900 times worse than that logo."

Come for the Coffee, Stay for the Dinosaurs

I know it's been a couple of years since they introduced their new logo, and maybe this is old news, but I'm not a coffee drinker, so I never really noticed this before. However, while sitting in a meeting with a client the other day, I noticed something rather peculiar about the Second Cup logo ...

Take a look:


That's right. The Second Cup logo is the Jurassic Park logo.

Sure, it's a great movie, and it's special effects still hold up quite nicely to this day, but to rip-off the logo completely? Really? For a coffee chain? Seriously? Ah well. What's done is done, and I suppose there are worse logos to copy.

Hmmmm ... I wonder if they have a T-Rex.

Red vs. Blue

One of my favourite blogs is Paul Lukas' UniWatch, which documents the ever-changing branding of sports teams, with an emphasis on logo changes and new uniform designs and styles. I enjoy reading it not only as a sports fan, but because it also provides some interesting insight into the marketing of professional sports (and it can be a pretty amusing read, too).

Now and then, Lukas will branch out and look at how other brands and logos came about, and given the rather significant event that took place this week in the United States, he dared to ask the question -- why are Republicans "red" and Democrats "blue"? He argued that since red is usually associated with leftists and communists, why is it so closely linked to the far right in the United States?

He got his answer from Josh Starr, a polling analyst for the 1996 Clinton campaign:

"When you sit down to develop an electoral map, you have to actively decide which colors to use ... I found that the networks were inconsistent in their assignment of colors to the different parties, so that wasn’t helpful. And the parties themselves tended to use red, white, and blue — again, no help. So I decided to assign the Democrats blue and Republicans red."

Yes, you read that correctly. A single polling analyst working for the Clinton campaign arbitrarily came up with the entire "red state" and "blue state" craze that now powers CNN and other news outlets. But why those colours? Why not the other way around?

"... We were centrist Democrats and I never liked the association of our party with red communism. So I wanted to symbolically throw the red back at the Republicans. I also saw the Republicans as more angry/red in the face/out of control. In addition, I associated red with a “red light” and stopping, while blue connotes something more positive and forward-thinking. All of these were reasons that went into my decision.

The funny thing is, I am a public opinion researcher and we never tested the branding impact of the colors red and blue — yet this is one decision that (unintentionally) has had long-lasting brand implications."

Interesting stuff. The whole site is filled with neat tidbits of information like this -- and since it's updated every day, there's always something new.

Just this week he interviewed the original designer of the Major League Baseball logo. The iconic logo was actually created in just a couple hours, and the original concept (drawn in magic marker!) was sent to MLB's office for approval -- and there were no changes to be made.

Much like the electoral college map, it's often the simplest elements that can have the longest lasting implications.

Pepsi's New Look: A Pointless Endeavour?

Perhaps you've seen or read about the brand new Pepsi logo and can design. I must say, it looks very nice -- quite modern and minimalist, almost like something you'd see in a sci-fi movie set in the "not-too-distant future" (although the slightly different logos for each type of Pepsi might be a bit too much).

That being said ... is the branding change really necessary? Honestly, who's going to look at the new Pepsi logo and say "Well, I've been a Coke guy all my life, but I think I'll switch now because I really like lower case lettering!"

Chances are, not very many.

In an article on Advertising Age ("What Went Into the Updated Pepsi Logo"), Frank Cooper, Pepsi's VP of Promotional Brands, was quoted as saying that when the campaign officially launches, "hate it or love it, you will absolutely know that Pepsi is out in the marketplace."

Yes, because that's exactly what Pepsi needs. Honestly, I don't know anybody who has ever heard of this obscure beverage-maker, and a new branding and marketing campaign will be just the ticket to say, "Look out world, Pepsi is here!"

Seriously now, when a company as large and established as Pepsi does this, it seems like it's just change for the sake of change.

Daily Breakthrough fave Seth Godin wrote a good piece about this on his blog ("Your Brand Is Not Your Logo"). He doesn't believe in Pepsi's claim that the new logo will help to win them more market share, saying:

Take the time and money and effort you'd put into an expensive logo and put them into creating a product and experience and story that people remember instead.

Good advice. While a strong logo and powerful branding is very important to a company's marketing -- especially for a new business trying to establish itself (and last time I checked, that doesn't describe Pepsi) -- in the end, it's the product and service experience that must be conveyed above everything else.

Marketing is about all of the visual and emotional elements working together in unison to create a cohesive brand -- something a mere logo update can't accomplish on its own.