Today I was forwarded a Mashable article about the controversial new GAP logo. What? Haven’t heard about it? Well, neither had I.
Apparently the company has created a new logo. “A more contemporary, modern expression” as described by a company spokesperson.
Author Jennifer Van Grove writes that the reaction’s been swift and merciless. “[F]ans, designers and webizens everywhere seem to hate it, so much so that the company appears to be changing course,” Grove writes.
She describes the outcry: Consumers are creating and posting new versions of the logo, parodying the logo, posting comments on Twitter and on the company’s Facebook page, they’re starting contests. And now Mashable is writing about it. Bad news, right? Wrong.
Isn’t this exactly what Gap wants? People talking about their brand?
Companies spend millions trying to start these kinds of conversations. Now GAP has started one. But instead of money, it’s cost them a tiny amount of damage to the brand. It will easily recover from this kerfluffle and in the end, the “crowdsourced” product/logo will be stronger than what GAP originally proposed (how could it not?).
Sounds like a good deal to me.
Filed under: communications, digital, Grassroots, Marketing | Tagged: Bill Chandler, branding, controversy, Crap Logo Yourself, crowd-sourced, crowd-sourcing, crowdsourced, crowdsourcing, facebook, GAP, GAP brand, GAP logo, Grassroots, Jennifer Van Grove, logo design, mashable, Twitter | 2 Comments »