Alternative London 2012 logo designs
You’ve been showing your annoyance / dislike / shock about yesterday’s launch for London’s 2012 logo. Thank you everyone who took time out to leave very welcomed comments in my previous olympic logo design article.
I woke up today to yet more news stories about the overwhelming negative impressions, worldwide, to London’s olympic logo, so thought I’d follow-up with a few more thoughts from around the online community.
The BBC are showing alternative logos submitted by their viewers, and whilst not great, I’ve picked out a few of that are more suitable than the chosen design:
Chris Autry, managing director of digital advertising agency Fhlame, noticed a resemblance to the children’s programme Tiswas of the 70s and 80s.
“Putting London in lower case and in cartoon writing is a “disgrace” to the city, and there’s an imbalance in having the word London and the Olympic rings both in the top half of the logo. The word London is in an inelegant font, which devalues London as a city. It looks like a child’s writing.”
The lower right logo design (above) was the original London olympic logo when the bid was being pitched. Infinitely better in my opinion, though I’m not keen on the legibility.
The design community continue to voice their opinions and here are just a few of the recent online articles:
Chase Jarvis discusses the shocking design spectrum.
The community at Creative Bits aren’t particularly in favour.
Aaron at miLienzo attempts to shed some positives on the logo design. One of the few I’ve seen.
Industrial Brand Creative ask, “Brilliant or Bollocks?”
Where’s the sausage says it’s like your dad disco dancing.
Duncan Borrowman reckons it looks like a 1980s art attack.
Reaction [beta] remind us that the client is just as responsible as the design agency.
Elbowruminations throw Miami Vice and WHAM! into the mix.
Chris at Thermal calls it a garish little squiggle.
Seth Godin reckons it’s just a jaggy picture.
I could go on, but I’ll leave it at this.
My thinking is that the positively huge waves of negativity (I really want to be positive) will force a redesign, and give back some international credit to the unbelievable design talent that the UK holds.
Related posts on this site
31 spot-on reader comments to “Alternative London 2012 logo designs”
What are your thoughts?
Simply fill in the form below. All comments are moderated so you may experience a short delay before your comment appears. Comments should be respectful of other voices in the discussion. I reserve the right to edit or delete comments at my discretion.
Thanks for the link David.
The best description of the logo I’ve read anywhere is that it looks like Lisa Simpson giving er, ‘oral pleasure’. :lol:
Personally I think a redesign is the absolutely worst thing they could do, it would be a PR disaster. A redesign would send out all the wrong signals about the British design community - that they got it wrong, that they have no confidence, that they bucked to international pressure, that it was a waste of money, the cock-up of all cock-ups, etc.
Whatever you think about the design, it IS a bold and brave design and for that to be worth anything at all they have to stick to their guns on it. This would show faith in their decision, and demonstrate that the British design community is bold and different - what makes it unique. These are good messages.
One thing’s for sure, they are not going to redesign it tomorrow, and personally I think opposition to this design will die down over the coming months. I think it’s a ‘grow-er’ ;)
I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a backlash against any logo. Ever. While I personally think the mark is awful, this design has become the most talked item on design forums on both sides of the pond. Using that barometer, the release has been a success. It’s also got people talking about design in general - not a bad thing I suppose.
I’ve seen that description on quite a few articles.
Aaron,
I know what you mean about a redesign PR disaster. Just incredibly wishful thinking on my behalf. I agree, bold, unique, these are great terms to have attached to a design community. I think there could’ve been a much better mark used to back it up though. Opposition will die down but I can’t see myself liking it.
Glad you commented though as difference of opinion is always healthy.
Steve,
I’m not sure there has been such a backlash before. I welcome any discussions around design and the olympic committee have certainly boosted their publicity. Thanks for stopping by and commenting.
Why is it the ‘big boys’ get away with producing absolute rubbish and charging fortunes when we, small provincial outfits, have to work so hard to justify every penny of our bill for producing highly creative work?
If I’d have presented this to one of our clients they would have kicked me out the door before I was able to burst into my first lines of a 1000 page document justifying our creative approach (bullshit) and why they should quite happily pay me £400,000!!!!!
Perhaps I should change my name to Wolff. No, perahps not, we don’t treat our clients like Little Red Riding Hood.
It’s about time the big budgets come our way. Do they realise they can get better work at a fraction of the cost.
Thanks for the link and for the incredibly thorough summary of the reacations! I think Aaron might be right that the logo is a bit of a “grower.” Like the blog Speak Up said, design trends recycle themselves every 30 years or so, and by the time 2010 rolls around, it will be 30 years since 1980. Maybe the logo is actually exteremly forward-thinking after all?
Then again, it might still suck, and continue to suck forever. I’m amazed by the Tiswas resemblence. That’s incredible.
I commented on this logo yesterday and looking at it again today something stuck me.
The 2012 element of the logo reminds me of a anti counterfeit design I created which was deliberately constructed using irregular letters to disguise the message. (message “popped” if color copied) Not the design approach you want to take if something really need to be read!
I agree with Aaron, it would be a PR disaster to change the logo now…particulary when it has so much publicity. Britain has made its bed and now has to lie in it!
Kevan, good point about the recycled trends and that it may be extremely forward thinking. Interesting idea.
Steve D, you’re right. In light of the attention it’s received, we might be able to consider the logo a success, even if in our opinion it’s awful. It’s memorable, no? And wasn’t that one of the marks of a good logo? Hmm… have we tried holding it up to the four guidelines for logos defined earlier in this blog?
I know that it was mentioned on the BBC interactive editor’s blog yesterday, but did you see the part about “Create your own design” on the official brand website? Maybe they will be evolving the logo this way, taking public submissions for the logo. I don’t think this section calls for a complete redesign of the logo, just a take on a template, but still, the firm that created the original might get inspired. It certainly roused the public to action and got their creative juices going! Some of the logos you shared above were not too shabby, especially for “lunch break” designs. They need a little polishing, but the ideas are good.
And Tiswas is reminiscent of the KISS logo.
I’ve just watched an article on the BBC evening news, and the video to accompany the logo launch has induced seizures in seven or eight people who suffer from epilepsy!
They’re looking into it as a matter of urgency, which isn’t surprising. It happens during the video clip of a diver hitting the water, when lots of flashing colours appear on the screen. The flash rate is against strict guidelines.
From bad to worse it seems.
[...] problema é que muita gente achou o logotipo feio demais. David Airey postou uma coleção de artigos discutindo o assunto e algumas versões alternativas, feitas pelos [...]
I like the second one best! Nice work! :)
David - they just broadcast on our nightly news that the animation of the logo is making people ill or have seizures. Certainly they are going to take another look at this logo. It seems to be turning into a bit of a marketing disaster.
This discussion really gets at the distinction between ‘brand’ and ‘mark.’ It’s an atrocious mark. Certainly no argument here. But will the ‘brand’ survive it? Will it be negatively effected (are fewer people going to enjoy the olympics because of it)? Is it possible for a brand to benefit from a bad mark?
(Though it does remind me of the worst parts of my job.)
Can any legal action be taken?
I like the second one, but it wouldn’t be valid I reckon, as it breaks the Olympic logo.
(Nice hike in RSS readers I see - Keep it up!)
Crazy isn’t it? I mentioned the seizures that people are having in my last comment here. The animated logo had to be removed from their website because of it.
Reid,
Hopefully a lot less emphasis will be placed on the logo and more on perhaps the mascot where placement is concerned. I don’t think the brand is being helped at all by the negative publicity, especially as people suffering from epilepsy have had seizures induced after being exposed to the olympics promotions.
Armen,
We’ll have to see what action is taken. It wouldn’t surpirse me if it was taken to court as there were no warnings given.
Off-topic, my RSS hike was due to a post making it to the front page of Digg. Yet again my host company’s abuse department sent me an email so I think I’ll have to upgrade to a dedicated server.
I’m sure the numbers will drop by tomorrow or the next day as these things are always temporary.
You have a keen eye though. ;)
Is there anyone out there who likes this design. Good post.
Congrats on the digg. BTW, check out dreamhost for a digg friendly host.
I’ve contacted Dreamhost about transferring my site. My current host provider is great, no doubt, apart from when I get a flood of new traffic.
I’m sure it’s an annoyance when readers keep getting 500 server errors.
If you get anything for a referral let me know your sign-up email address and I’ll list your good self.
Those are so much better than the angular 3 year-old’s collage.
As a side note, your feedburner thingy says you have exactly 1000 readers. How cool is that?
The logo is awful I don’t think there’s too much dispute; however, couple that with the awful website design, and you have one smelly design carcass.
They were showing the clip this morning on an Australian breakfast show, talking about those having seizures and fits. It is so embarrasing. I’m sure when the chief promotion manager was thinking of ways to get worldwide publicity, they never thought of this!
Wow what an embarrassment for London the 2012 campaign and the UK. If some things crap then its crap if it sends out the wrong signals about the British design community then too bad get it right next time!! (After all that’s what someone is getting paid a lot of money to do) If it was your personal company logo you would sack the designer.
Kind of reminds me of the emperors new clothes (children’s story) Are we the Emperor?
I had a very long rant on the Brand Republic site so won’t bore you with it again here. I, like almost everyone else, don’t like this ‘brand’, ‘mark’ or what ever we are calling it today - a poor representation of what the British design industry can produce. It’s clunky, lacks any style and to be quite honest looks like an early concept scamp that has somehow made it all the way through to approval. And yes, it does look like something a 12 year old could produce - and that’s doing an injustice to most 12 year olds.
I’m all for being bold and memorable but not at the expense of good design, which this clearly is not. OK it’s generated the most incredible response - the kind of PR exposure that any agency might be proud of - but the expression ‘there is no such thing as bad publicity’ can’t apply here.
I disagree about not having a re-design - it should be. The argument that having it re-designed will be a PR disaster and reflect badly on the British design community doesn’t stand up. Surely it would be better to hold your hands up and say ‘fair enough’ and admit you might have got it wrong. Sticking with a logo that is so universally hated will surely do more damage to what is, at the moment at least, a British industry that leads the rest of the world.
I think that a good idea might be to choose one of the many thousand “free” logos that many designers have and wil submit as alternatives. A contest to redesign the logo would be great. It would send out the message that
1. They are listening to the public and we agree that they might have messed up a bit, and
2. Because they spent so much money on the first effort, they are going to try and minimize taxpayer cost
Heck, they may even be able to get a sponsor to pay for the cost of the redesign.
One problem is that the logo itself is probably not the sole delivery of the money that was spent. There have been videos created, style guides made, and maybe even signage designed for all of the venues. That takes a lot of money and time to aredesign
Thanks for your comments. You make valid points about having a re-design. It’s such a botch job in my eyes, and the seizure inducing promo video was the icing on the cake.
My friend Lee makes a great point about all the newspapers saying we should let school children design the logo and the money could go to schools. Children can’t design! It’s ridiculous.
John,
The money that was spent is absolutely not for just the logo. It’s most likely used for brand placement, guidelines, website development, promotional material etc etc.
Thanks very much for everyone’s thoughts on this.
Organising an event like Olympics involved the entire country and not just the government and the organising committee. No wonder the British citizens were unhappy. Out of curisity, I check out Sydney 2000, Athens 2004 and Beijing 2008. Well, nationalism is evident in the graphic execution.
The current design will probably remain it would be a PR disaster as pointed out by Aaron
I think that the ‘official’ logo is not at all appropriate of what London, Britain or the Olympic Games are about. In my oppinion the 2nd replacement logo shown on this page is much better, though i would take out the slogan ‘we’ve got the olympics in us’, which really does not work!
I’ve been a designer for 21 years and a member of The Chartered Society of Designers for 14, so you could say that I have an eye for such things. I, like the majority of people it seems was also shocked, disgusted and embarrassed when the 2012 logo was launched.
Now, having lived with it for a few weeks, it has started to grow on me, apart from the hot pink, which will always be vile, I’d go as far as to say I almost like it.
There are elements of the logo which are tacky, the way the word London and the Olympic rings are treated, but if the design evolves I’m happy to watch its progress.
Seb Coe is right about London deserving more than just another corporate looking logo (see the Olympic bid version). In 5 years time we may all be wondering what the fuss was all about.
hi,
im studying graphics at the moment and our project is to re-design the olympic logo for london 2012 like you have done and the designs are very i good. i agree with what matt has said- design no. 2 is very good but i would also take the slogan-”we’ve got the olympics in us” because it sort of ruins the the design i think..but your ideas are very good.
Im an AS level student taking graphics and i am looking to produce a directional sign based on the london Olympics, when i fist saw the logo it looked like my nephew could have drawn it - and he is 5. But when i took a closer look, i think it was designed to appeal to a very wide age range, children for example would never look at something an adult looks at, but an adult will look at what has caught the childs eye, so therefore it is attracting all ages.
The ideas above aren’t actually mine, but taken off the BBC website, submitted by viewers.
Interesting that you and Lexie are both working on projects with the Olympic logo. It’d be great if you showed the results online for me / us to see.
Great work. You definately chose the pick of the bunch. Agree with Stuey. I think it’s almost certain we will have forgotten what all the fuss was about with the design of the logo. I just read Wolff Olins own case study. I can see what they are trying to achieve with the logo and when presented in different forms throughout the five years I think we may even be saying it was the best olympic logo of recent times…