Many of you showed your dislike of the London 2012 logo, launched yesterday. A quick thanks to those who left comments in my previous post.
I woke up to more news about the negative impressions of the logo, so thought I’d follow-up with a few thoughts from around the Internet.
The BBC is showing alternative logos by viewers. Not great, but I’ve picked out a few:
Chris Autry, managing director of ad 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 (above) was the original London Olympic logo during the pitch. Much better, although the legibility could be improved.
The design community continue to voice opinions — here are a few 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 won’t.