The Gap Logo Scandal
Posted on October 7th, 2010 in Small Business | 1 Comment »
Ok. Scandal might be a stretch, but there is some real internet hating going on and its directed at the new Gap logo. Here’s what all the fuss is about:
Gone is the classic Spire typeface on a navy black box, and in its place, Helvetica with a floating box (is that supposed to represent faded jeans?) New? Yes. Original? Yeah, right. But maybe originality isn’t the goal. More on that in a bit.
Gap premiered the logo Monday morning, and a day went by with hardly any excitement. Then the hate spewed. The Consumerist questions if this will be the next Tropicana flop. Ad Age likens the logo to “something a child created using a clip-art gallery“. There are now fake Twitter accounts for both the new logo and the old logo. There’s now a Crap Logo Generator out there so you can create your own crap logo. I made my own Helvetica/Hipster logo in about 5 seconds!
Speaking of hipster, the CEO of Helvetica power-user American Apparel, recently declared the hipster trend dead. By switching typefaces, is Gap headed into a dead space of old fashion trends? Time will tell. Gap may actually be on to something here.
Gap is the world’s 84th most powerful brand, yet sales have stagnated despite the classic look and brand recognition. This new look could be the saving grace they need. A whole new market of consumers who did not grow up with the brand, and are always looking for something new, could be tapped into. This is a market that might not mind a generic logo, and in fact would welcome it, instead of chasing brands all around fashion. Gap could let their product and customer service be what they are known for…but then they screwed up big time.
Gap, being the forward thinking company they are, use many different social media platforms to speak with their customers. This was posted to their Facebook wall yesterday:
Thanks for everyone’s input on the new logo! We’ve had the same logo for 20+ years, and this is just one of the things we’re changing. We know this logo created a lot of buzz and we’re thrilled to see passionate debates unfolding! So much so we’re asking you to share your designs. We love our version, but we’d like to see other ideas. Stay tuned for details in the next few days on this crowd sourcing project.
And now we have a scandal. Buzz? They must still believe that any publicity is good publicity. Passionate debate is a pretty lame way to say everyone hates it. Crowd sourcing works great for things like Wikipedia and Captcha to digitize books, but designing logos? Now they are pandering to, what will now be an ever-growing, internet hate mob. The message I get from this is “Okay, since you’re complaining so much, let’s see if you can do any better.”
When you read crowd sourcing in their statement, you should think spec work. Spec work is an insult to professional graphic designers. Instead, they should have hired a talented designer and let them do what they do best.
The logo was not THAT bad. It was generic and a complete departure from their original logo. They could be forgiven for this but instead are now a joke. They should have had the confidence to stick with their decision instead of turning around and begging their followers for their forgiveness in the form of pandering. After all, if you’re doing something right you’re going to have haters. It just comes with the territory.
