Patience is the art of hoping.
The partial unveiling of the new AOL identity earlier this week produced many smiles, snickers and rather nasty blog posts, but few moments of reflection in the brand community. How do we explain our rush to judgment for the new AOL logo, compliments of Wolff Olins?
Should we not be the first to advise others to wait until the full program is launched, to assess the value of the logo on its ability to support the brand expression, to take the time to understand how the visual identity fits within the business strategy. Branding 101, no? Shame on us for throwing away sound branding principles to enjoy a fleeting, childish moment of pleasure!
Someone wrote that patience is the art of hoping. While early critics might be right about AOL (or should I be writing Aol.) , I am opting to wait patiently until December 10th and hope to be filled with delight and admiration! If that does not happen, I can always stroll up the avenue from Times-Warner to check out the new Apple store and watch a real brand in action! Either way, patience will have paid off!
Well said and I agree with the wisdom of waiting to see what develops, but isn’t the immediate reaction part of the mix? I believe that first impressions are important because they set the tone for the rest of the conversation.
November 25, 2009
Totally agree with the importance of first impressions. Which leads to an interesting question…Why would AOL choose to unveil the logo alone, without the full surround effect?
November 25, 2009
I agree with Tony Spaeth in questioning the cap “A” and lowercase “ol” which turns it into an unpronounceable word, rather than three letters.
November 25, 2009
I agree that we will have to wait and see the whole program launch. AOL certainly has taken some hits over the year in terms of being perceived as the Internet for people that “don’t understand the Internet”.
It will be interesting to see if they can turn around all the negative perceptions. They certainly own enough strong properties and assets that seem to do OK. I think the question is: “Will the revitalized brand sufficiently address the negative connotations associated with AOL?”
November 25, 2009
Nice comment.
I agree the launch, content, and how the imagery works with the content will really change the way I feel about this approach. The same feeling I have for the 2012 Olympic Logos, I felt potential and lots of fun deriving from this. My major dig is the awesome use of video and how each motion really works for Aol. <- punt!
My strongest negativity against this is the use of imagery. It's fine to use the pop culture and all that, which the video has successfully capture the essence, however print wise that sensibility has lost. The lack of motion and the forceful placement of the type inside an image is somewhat prequel to a greater idea in my opinion. There is gotta be a better way to produce better print works than lay out pixel arts with the logo in it…
But whatever, I'm opinionated!
November 26, 2009