Olympic Fallout
Wow. Since my post about the new logo for the 2012 London Olympics games, the inter-web has been a buzz with negativity. I find all of the hubbub rather interesting (and in some cases, a little amusing). I think anytime design gets discussed in a public forum, even if it is to point out design that is largely unpopular, I think that it is a good thing.
To me, aside from the aesthetic merits of the logo, I find the resulting public relations fallout to be the most interesting aspect of this mess. The old saying that “there is no such thing as bad publicity” really gets put to the test here. The logo is certainly generating a lot of discussion, but is it a good thing when a lot of it centers around demanding the mark be changed? Or that an animated version of the logo potentially may cause epileptic seizures? Or that a large amount of people have felt compelled to try their hand at creating a better mark?
To be fair, not all of the reaction has been negative. Some have argued that the mark works just fine. While I don’t agree with these sentiments, I do respect that the designers tried to come up with something different. While I don’t feel that “different” necessarily translated into “good” in this instance, I hope this incident doesn’t dissuade other designers from trying to push people’s expectations. And let’s face it, when all is said and done, no one can argue that the logo that didn’t leave one heckuva mark.
Posted by Trev on June 7th, 2007
Filed under Branding, Design, Marketing | No Comments »
Leave a Reply