BBC Select to return as a brand

Considering how the BBC like to rebrand gradually nowadays rather than do it all at once surely if the BBC logo was changing they'd do it one block at a time.

I can totally see that now thanks to those examples. Whoever is in charge of brand management at the BBC obviously isn’t a stickler for detail.

I do however still think that the BBC Select logo seems more of an intentional departure from the BBC blocks we all know and see.

I don’t think anyone’s reading anything into it beyond that the BBC has used many bodged versions of its logo over the years which haven’t necessarily been a foretaste of an upcoming rebrand.

This probably doesn't mean anything as I have no concept of how copyright works, but the footer of the BBC Select website states that the logo has 1996 copyright. Firstly I thought the Lambie-Nairn logo was introduced in 1997 (but I guess they had to copyright it beforehand), but if that's the case then why would the bizarre BBC Select logo have the same copyright as the masterbrand Lambie-Nairn logo, if it's a new logo?

The caption underneath the screenshot literally said:
"Spotted this similar logo on a BBC job posting on facebook... seems a brand refresh is on the way"

Speaking of which: their current logo that they only introduced last month (together with its slightly shorter new name) still uses Good ol’ Gill Sans.



Yessss, you line up those letters neatly with those blocks, baby!!


EDIT:
Here’s the logo animation as well.

Yes, thankfully they've used the Gill Sans logo in their re-brand, but still not the correct masterbrand version of it I don't think. The spacing between the blocks looks too small and the Gill Sans used looks too thin when compared to the official logo.

This is the issue with the the BBC is that they are such a large global organisation with so many different sub-brands and offshoots that it can be very difficult to keep a consistent brand concept when you have regional divisions doing their own things with the brand. But this builds the argument evermore for consistency and standardisation in the brand, given they are such a widely renowned brand, they should have consistency and strong direction from Broadcasting House in how the brand should be presented, with strict guidelines to follow to. Brand consistency should be a core concept for an organisation as big as the BBC, yet they seem to not treat it as seriously as they should, which could weaken their brand identity.

I did see the BBC blocks as the connecting factor between each branch of the organisation, almost as if 'BBC' is a brand used by many different smaller organisations who then apply their own design concepts around that. However now with this BBC Select logo awfulness, I don't know what to think anymore!

The BBC's branding is completely chaotic and needs to be standardised. They need another Lambie-Nairn 1997 or France Télévisions 2018 style brand overhaul in my opinion, whilst still keeping the Gill Sans block logo however, as this has become so distinctive as the BBC logo.

I think all we can say is that sensitivities have changed over the years, and Saville I think epitomised everything the critics felt was wrong with the BBC and the corporation is now very sensitive towards those kinds of associations.

I don't know if there is even an answer to the problem of separating art from the artist - today, we seem less inclined to be able to do so.

For what it's worth, I think trying out a new logo in a non-core market to see how it works is quite likely, the underlying motivations for doing so - well, I think there is some truth to my point.

The BBC it seems is typical of many large organisations where people and teams tend to be siloed off - a lot of the inconsistency we see is just down to that.... but that all said, the brand is a mess and has been for a long time, possibly even for all of time, except between 1997 and about 2002!

Oh yes, so it does. Must have skimmed over that, and assumed nobody would ever actually think that. Either way, that certainly wasn’t the point I was making.

But in 1997 the slanted logo was considered distinctive and the BBC logo. Every criticism of this refresh was also said of Nairn's redesign in 97. People seem to be forgetting, or ignoring, the fact it was considered an unnecessary waste of money at the time.

What 'refresh' - the blocks aren't changing - this is a simple case of a designer (let's be honest, probably based abroad and doesn't see the BBC logo every day) recreating something with the tools they've been given (BBC Reith?).

What I can see has happened is someone outside the BBC being asked to come up with a logo for this new service, they've gone 'sure, what font is used in the BBC logo' and someone with no design eye or basic knowledge has gone 'This is the BBC typeface, BBC Reith. Sign the disclaimer for its use' and the designer has plonked it into some boxes, rather than trying to find a vector drawing of the current logo that doesn't come from wikipedia.

People seem to be criticising the way the brand management has fallen apart at the seams and is inconsistent - which is exactly what internal criticism lead to the 1997 rebrand - a wholesale rebrand isn't needed - a realignment is. Instill some clear rules again and enforce them, reject things that don't conform and instruct everyone to replace whatever copies of the BBC logo they use already - just reissue the master artwork.




An interesting article; but along with this thread I'm getting annoyed with the term 'masterbrand' being used, I'm not sure it's even a word. I'd question their sources.

For instance, we have a network news/regional news director on the site and they were heard earlier in this thread to say:

A named source, we can trust in the veracity of his claims.

I think there's a strong degree of people wanting to see more in this than there is, for whatever reason.

If you're basing your scepticism on the word "masterbrand", whilst you won't find it in the OED it is a word used to describe a brand like the main BBC brand.