A senior level decision has been taken to deviate from the master brand for the launch of a new international commercial service.
Does this variation succeed on a technical level, where the 1997 logo would falter? *Maybe* the extra space between each block makes it slightly more legible at smaller sizes? I'm being kind there.
Aesthetically, it lacks the finesse of the 1997 logo while relying heavily on its equity, so it just looks like a knock off.
Really weird. As discussed at the start of the thread, either this is a taste of things to come or a failure of good brand management.
And in the age we live in, "playing around" with the master brand is not a sensible road to head down. I would immediately think "scam app" if I saw that in the app store, for example.
It's even in really low quality on the Amazon page.
So wait, you're telling me that NO ONE told them they were using the wrong BBC logo and they've basically just gone ahead and done this without knowing?
Has the BBC actually addressed the off-brand blocks in this official logo at all? I see a few questions underneath the tweet posted above, but they don't seem to have actually responded.
I know they've been slightly less strict about the boxes in recent years, but launching a new brand with newly-created and incorrect boxes is beyond anything they've done before, and there must have been a point in the process where this was ok'd in some way.
I'm reliably informed that BBC Studios was originally going to launch with exactly the same disaster of a blocks logo and that this is, sadly, entirely on purpose bc an actual designer thinks it is good and them upstairs are too dozy to notice.
Maybe they were inspired by that disaster that appears when people share links to the BBC Jobs website on facebook.
It sounds like they’re singlehandedly trying to rebrand the BBC by stealth. The question is how many other brands is this person going to be working on? Are they just working on the ‘BBC Studios’ businesses or could this appear on a future logo for BBC One?
I'm reliably informed that BBC Studios was originally going to launch with exactly the same disaster of a blocks logo and that this is, sadly, entirely on purpose bc an actual designer thinks it is good and them upstairs are too dozy to notice.
Maybe they were inspired by that disaster that appears when people share links to the BBC Jobs website on facebook.
It sounds like they’re singlehandedly trying to rebrand the BBC by stealth. The question is how many other brands is this person going to be working on? Are they just working on the ‘BBC Studios’ businesses or could this appear on a future logo for BBC One?
I think that could be the future logo of the entire corporation, as brioalex confirmed, the font inside the BBC Select logo is indeed the Reith font
:-(
A former member
Well if it is a new logo, we can look forward to it appearing on BBC Parliament sometime in 2065.
I don't think that will become the future corporate logo; but I do expect they've considered Reith in the boxes and tried some ideas out.
Even though it can be argued that Gill is no longer in use by the BBC the font within the official boxes is a modified version of Gill Sans Medium (+ a line around the letters to give it some weight), and is drawn - rather than simply being BBC typed into the boxes therefore licensing isn't an issue.
From a branding perspective I think that changing to this mess will simply weaken the core brand and at some stage someone else would have to come along and redo Martin Lambie-Nairn's work again. These things go in cycles, and I do think the ease of being a 'designer' is making bad recreations and ideas come to the fore.
I can't imagine the BBC is considering a rebrand of the blocks right now when their finances are the way they are. Consider the cost of updating all of their presentation on screen, the cost of rebranding everything across all of their studios and offices in the UK and worldwide, right down to the signage, mugs and stationary, rebranding every single asset they own online right down to the endless resources on Bitesize and the like. A rebrand is an expensive cost that I'm not sure they can afford right now.
I expect this is a case of their American outpost (wrongly) signing off something they felt would match the service better with little input from London. The BBC have deviated from Lambie-Nairn's rules many times over the years so I just count this as another one, albeit a bit more extreme that the other occasions!
I can't imagine the BBC is considering a rebrand of the blocks right now when their finances are the way they are. Consider the cost of updating all of their presentation on screen, the cost of rebranding everything across all of their studios and offices in the UK and worldwide, right down to the signage, mugs and stationary, rebranding every single asset they own online right down to the endless resources on Bitesize and the like. A rebrand is an expensive cost that I'm not sure they can afford right now.
I expect this is a case of their American outpost (wrongly) signing off something they felt would match the service better with little input from London. The BBC have deviated from Lambie-Nairn's rules many times over the years so I just count this as another one, albeit a bit more extreme that the other occasions!
I agree with you that the BBC won’t be rebranding any time soon and that this is an anomaly. Now it’s out there and “official” though, I think it’s quite a dangerous precedent to have set. I just hope it doesn’t lead to overall diluting of the core brand, with every new platform and channel taking their own misguided liberties going forward.
If the BBC wants to rebrand they'll rebrand - cost won't come into it. If it means a few people losing their jobs so the B B C inside the boxes and a different font, so be it.