http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-11517129
Gap retreats from it's new logo campaign after loyal consumers complain. The BBC article traces several brand that have received harsh criticism after revamping their logos.
Important point for media literacy: "In fact that is a good analogy to logos and brands - if we think of a brand being someone's personality and the logo being someone's face it makes it easier to see why as humans we like familiarity and how breaking that connection can cause confusion and puzzlement."
brand=personality
logo=face
When a brand changes its logo too rapidly, it's like Michael Jackson (R.I.P.) getting one too many nosejobs.
The interesting thing about this story is the power of consumers to cause a change in brand policy. That is, consumers demonstrated that they liked the old GAP face, and saw no need for something new. The feedback was provided in part through social media (i.e. Facebook).
Admittedly, consumer backlash against less positive logo decisions can easily be ignored. In the case of BP's logo shift, environmentalists sent the message "we didn't like the BP brand before, and we hate the new logo." Thus, companies like feedback that's going to make them look good because it helps them assess the value of their brand's image.
I hope consumers will start sending the same messages not only about brand logos, but also about unnecessary innovations. For example, the new version of Microsoft Office I have to use at work just confuses the hell out of me, and I saw nothing inadequate with the old one. Practically every digital video editor I know agrees that the older versions of iMovie were much better and easier to use than the newer ones. When are we going to start saying that we don't need every product to get a "new, fresh look," when it's the same old stuff? Issues with software innovation or brand revamping or relabeling might be subtler than logo changes, but the GAP case shows that consumers have the power to say "No thanks" to the ad-makers.
No comments:
Post a Comment