Fascinating conversations going on about the London Olympics 2012 logo. It looks on the face of it like a complete muck-up, certainly in terms of how the new logo was presented. How very 1990s!
'Wally' Olins described it as "a powerful brand taking its place in a brand-savvy world." The trouble is that the world is much more brand savvy than the Brand Consultants behind the logo.
Could the whole logo farrago be a turning point in brand-public relations?
Johnnie Moore's excellent post shows the dangers of a PR firm trying to be leaders in social media but revealing themselves to be party to "a bit of Marketing 1.0 nonsense".
The tone of the launch reminded me of those 90s TV adverts for Phileas Fogg crisps with Geoffrey Palmer's VO, "Pay attention! Crunchy golden chips made from sun-ripened corn, delicately flavoured with cheese and spices. Made in Medomsley Road, Consett".
At least the last part was factual.
Did the Olympic Committee and their PR advisers seriously think that the British public would agree that the logo "would … inspire everyone and reach out to young people around the world"?
In what way exactly does the logo represent inclusiveness? Other than in the fact that everyone seems to hate it? Or maybe, to hate the way it has been presented to us.
Around our office opinions are divided. Some see it as brave and radical, especially when they worked out the jigsaw shapes spelled out 2012. Others find it gratuitous and vaguely grotesque, a minority (of one) could not get past the now notorious visual reference to Lisa Simpson.
Our contribution to the debate is to remind you of previous Olympic logos. They look very conventional by comparison with 2012, don't they?
Then there's this poster from the London Olympics in 1908 - a bit of a favourite, here. See more posters here.
So, where has 100 years of the branding business got us all?