Note however, that despite a seriously low approval rating and widespread criticism of the logo by Brits and others alike, the London 2012 comittee have released only two statements since this all started! The first one, in response to an expert on the radio stating that the log failed epilepsy standards and therefore could not legally be broadcast on TV, said (paraphrasing!)
"Ooops, sorry...but...errr...it wasn't our fault, the design company (Named) were supposed to check this and everything else"
and then, in response to the general criticism (Again paraphrasing!)
"This is not negotiable, we have decided, get used to it"
Now, the first point, if London 2012 put together a design / project brief and then asked for tenders, that *should* have included all relevant media tests and industry standards. If it did, the brief was not fulfilled and therefore should not have been accepted. If it didn't, well it's their fault!
The second point...well that just says it all! Clearly the consultation work done by A) the designers and B) the 2012 Comittee was fundamentally flawed! If such widespread hatred of the logo is to be believed, the only consultation they did was presumably with the three blind mice in a basement somewhere!
My personally opinion? It's not that bad, I kind of like the way it works and it does everything a snappy logo should do...but if the public at large don't like it, it's a failure! There have been lots of pieces of work I have done that I thought were good, tenders to prospective clients etc where we all sat around when finishing the report congratulating ourselves on a job well done only to be laughed out of the room by the prospect and they go and appoint someone else. This is usually because the brief was either not clear or specific enough, or we had misinterpreted the brief and not checked our understanding. You see, it's the market that dictates a succesful outcome, not the designers and sponsors of a project. The sooner London 2012 learn this the better and any negative press now will not go away, especially with crap statements like the above!
While we are on the subject of failed design briefs, I work in a building called Hadrian House which has recently had a refit and new marketing agency. They came up with this logo for the building:
That's right folks, a giant penis is now on the side of our building!
Again, we were not consulted about this by the landlords and nor were any other tennants.
Have a guess what some particularly creative vandals have now done with some simple strokes of a magic marker?
Debating Online Forums
Author
