Logo Madness: Plagiarism, Personality and Simplicity

FacebookLinkedInTwitter

5167

The past fortnight has brought some boffo changes to the world of global logos and corporate identity systems. First, the 2020 Olympic committee decided to jettison their fairly distinctive logo for, well not being distinctive enough and subject to accusations of plagiarism. Then there were the rebranding efforts of two of the largest and most high profile organizations in country, Verizon and Google. As much as each is significant in its own right, they all present a lesson or two in modern branding.

Beginning with the Olympic logo, you have to feel some sympathy for the designer, assuming that nothing was actually plagiarized (and as of this writing no evidence has turned up that would support such a claim). As our design team points out, the would-have-been 2020 Olympic logo uses basic forms and shapes common across many visual systems. Given that it is impossible to check all logos, especially obscure ones from halfway around the planet, how much “blame” can really be leveled at the designer? Indeed, it gets at the heart of what constitutes originality. Take, for instance, the 1992 and the 2000 Olympic logos. They share a large number of elements—from color to form. Obviously the 2000 creator knew of the 1992 logo. Should we then also refer to the 2000 logo as a copy?

It seems that the question of what constitutes original work could become an even thornier issue in the coming years. This brings us to the next logo—Verizon. Verizon is just the latest of an endless parade of corporations “simplifying” their logos to make it as “clean” as possible. What this means in practice is that more and more corporate identities are so “simple” that they have become simplistic with little to no distinguishing elements, making them, as we argued last year, homogenous “little boxes on the hillside.” We look forward to the time when this simplicity-to-the-point-of-simplistic logo design trend runs its course, just as the trend of including swoosh-like forms to ride the coattails of Nike’s success did in the 1980s and 90s.

OlgXtsvw4y

Google’s new logo, while admittedly simple, has some color and personality. In fact, it’s so friendly we would have liked to have invited it over for a Labor Day BBQ, if Google weren’t an incorporeal entity, that is. We suspect that the disarming friendliness and approachability of the new Google logo is in fact a masterstroke as the search behemoth approaches total monopolistic domination with its current accelerating 67% desktop and 83% mobile search market share. And this brings us to the final lesson. While “simplicity” and “cleanliness” may look slick on the corner of a webpage, it’s the expression of a brand’s personality that should always be at the heart of a logo. Or, perhaps in Google’s case, the personality they want to project to the world. There is no cold, calculating simplicity for Google, what with their slanted “e” at the end. It’s sort of like the logo equivalent of a wink, even though the joke may be on us. They’ve got a personality so cute and cuddly that we would never be nervous about handing over our most sensitive personal data to them to unleash precisely targeted offers to buy more stuff that we will be powerless to resist. If we think of it in terms of economic stimulus vs. ensuing default, now that’s a brand friend we can trust.

Now It’s Your Turn
FacebookLinkedInTwitter
Culture, Trends
New Year’s Resolutions For Brands – 2020

Just like for their human stewards, the start of a new year (and decade!) provides a propitious promontory for brands to reflect back and evaluate all they’ve accomplished – and envision how they’d want the following year to look. What were some of the biggest achievements this year? What are some of the things we […]

Learn More
Culture, Trends
Watching Communication Change – 1920s vs. 2020s

One of the most striking facets of the debacle of WeWork’s failed IPO and its pre-Thanksgiving set of layoffs is how very public the raw news has spread. Of course, people pay attention to a company with such a meteoric rise and there may as well be a bit of schadenfreude watching the implosion of […]

Learn More
Culture, Trends
1920s vs. 2020s – A Happy 100 Years to These Brands

Brands come and go, some as ephemeral and fleeting as a quickly-glimpsed subway ad, others as durable and long-lasting as the classic Coca-Cola logo. What was once the height of fashion can quickly fall to the discount-rack of abandonment. But there are some brands that have an enduring ability to resonate with us, an atemporality […]

Learn More
Culture, Trends
Looking Back in Time: the 1920s vs. the 2020s

The end of a decade inevitably elicits a thoughtful analysis of the previous 10 years. What were the defining cultural phenomena of the decade? What inventions have helped us evolve? How should we view ourselves as a society now? While every decade has its remarkable facets, some decades are characterized by more noteworthy milestones, breakthroughs […]

Learn More

Ready to talk about how your brand and culture can do more for your business?

Let's talk
Let's talk