Projector

It’s been almost 4 and a half years since the London 2012 Olympics logo was launched (no really it has!) and as the competition draws near we were wondering how opinions to the brand identity might have changed as time has passed.

Take a step back to 2007; Jade Goody is in trouble over alleged racial abuse on Celebrity Big Brother, Madeline McCann disappears from an apartment in Praia da luz, the final Harry Potter book is released and the world is teetering on the brink of a financial crisis. On June 4th the London 2012 Olympic Logo is unveiled; a representation of the number 2012 with the Olympic Rings embedded within the zero.

Early reaction to the design was (to say the least) less than positive. A poll on the BBC website resulted in 80% of voters giving it a negative rating, it was likened to a distorted ‘Swastika’ and numerous unofficial competitions we’re run, suggesting alternative designs. Worse still, animated footage released at the same time as the logo and used as a TV sequence resulted in a number of epileptic seizures.

So, not the best reception to a brand launch then, but what do we think of it now that we’ve had a chance to live with it?

Back in 2007 I was firmly in the camp of ‘what were they thinking?’ I thought it was garish and brash, ‘london’ in a bespoke typeface squeezed into the 2 of 2012 looked odd. But, looking at it from purely a brand consultant point of view (with constructive criticism) it did tick the box of being unique and memorable and it certainly was adaptable to work alongside sponsors brands. No matter how much I tried to find merit in the mark though, I couldn’t quite get past the initial shock of my first reaction.

Re-visiting the logo now and seeing how the brand’s visual style has developed in the years since it’s birth, I must admit I do seem to be warming to the energetic appeal of the bright colours and sharp shapes used. As a visual style for the worlds greatest sporting competition in 2012 I believe these elements are relevant and appropriate. No love has been lost regarding the typeface however; it reminds me of the graffiti I used to see scratched into the wooden desks at school.

Looking at how the brand identity has been applied to marketing collateral I’m left with the sense that nothing quite fits; the elements seem to fight each other. The logo shape itself has actually faired quite well over the years, as a stand alone element it works; it’s bold, recognisable and full of energy. However it’s the execution and application that is letting the overall brand look and feel down for me; perhaps it’s been made too adaptable, resulting in a dilution of what could be a strong identity. I fear the London 2012 Olympic brand identity may be destined to go down in history, remembered alongside the iconic 80′s shell suit phenomena it so closely resembles.

It would be great to hear your opinion – did you hate it and now like it?