- Don’t underestimate your B2B house list for new leads
- Holiday e-mail is on the rise
- The blue light battle to beating consumers’ spending fear
- E-mailing the house file generates a surprising number of new leads
- Slinging the Web workflow
- How to appeal to Gen X shoppers in a down economy
- Case Study: How NOT to execute an online promotion
- E-mail delivers cost-effective ROI
Main Content
June 6, 2007
The 2012 Olympic logo-good, bad, or ugly?
This week's unveiling of the 2012 London Olympic and Paralympic games logo in the UK struck a note…by most accounts bad…about the power of good and bad branding—especially as it relates to brand identity or logos. Please look away … it's the 2012 logo | Special reports | Guardian Unlimited
There's no doubt the 2012 logo has attracted attention. Following a star-studded unveiling in London, online petitions to change the logo, sites requesting new design ideas and blogs discussing the failure to capture the spirit of the event quickly emerged. So did news accounts addressing the development costs (estimated at $800,000 USD), the hidden images—some comical, some naughty—found in the logo, and one unforeseen side effect of viewing the logo in motion—apparently the animation caused seizures among some viewers.
Not exactly what the committee had in mind, I'd guess, when they chose the winner. So what went wrong? Obviously there is a certain amount of subjectivity when choosing a logo, and there will always be critics. In this case, having roughly 50,000 (and counting) signatures on a petition calling to change the logo goes beyond the typical push back.
Posted by Anne Hendrickson, Creative Director, on June 6, 2007 at 4:57 PM.
Read more posts by me.
E-mail me | Comment on this post
Subscribe to the OvationBlog




