Say Hello to the Logo Police
August 20th, 2008
The Wall Street Journal reported this weekend that there is a large group of Chinese people that have been employed by the International Olympic Committee to walk around the Olympic venues and Village and PUT TAPE OVER ANY LOGO that isn’t an Olympic Sponsor.
Seriously.
That means tape over signs on elevators. Fire alarms. Air conditioners. Faucets. And even toilets. They’ve made people walking into the venues turn their t-shirts inside out if they have a logo that isn’t an Olympic sponsor.
Their reasoning? “…such “brand protection” is essential for the Games to raise the corporate money that keeps them going and growing. The Games get 40% of their revenue from sponsors, with the rest coming from broadcast rights, ticketing and licensing. Sponsors of China’s Games, believed to be the most lucrative ever, have contributed some $1.5 billion in cash, goods and services, estimates sports-marketing group Octagon.”
I’m not buyin’ it. Because that’s not reality. What kind of a world would it be if Coca-Cola, McDonald’s, Visa, Samsung Electronics, Bank of China and Volkswagen were the only brands that existed? That’s not the world we live in.
It kind of reminds me of companies that police their logo with a pack of lawyers and a vengeance. If one of their customers makes their own t-shirt with Brand X on it and the company finds out, it’s lawsuit threatening time. I’m not talking about using the company logo to SELL things. I’m talking about using the company logo to support and show admiration and evangelism for the company. But then here comes the marketing department and the lawyers, “That’s not our PMS colors! You can’t put the logo on a black background!”
Look, I’m in total agreement that from the inside, marketing departments and their partners should be extremely consistent in how the brand is portrayed and presented. Hell, one of the deliverables we give our clients is an Online Identity Manager that is basically their “Brand Bible.” But from the outside, I truly believe that companies need to completely change how they view customers using their brand and logo. Sure, it’s probably not the corporate standard, but it’s a sign of a fan. And it’s free exposure. It starts conversations with other fans. Above all, it’s authentic.
Control is overrated. And in all reality, a company’s control over a brand is a complete illusion. Sure, they invented the brand. But they don’t own it. So my advice to the logo and branding police: get a new job. This is a battle you shouldn’t even be fighting.
Other posts by Spike.
jeff says:
I’m always amused by stories about marketing depts. and lawyers coming down on fans that misused the logo. I love reading the rules that marketing depts have for their logos especially when they get into the specifics. It’s more specific than the directions on a prescription.
August 20th, 2008 at 6:46 amChris says:
Wow. I can see your connection, and yes - brand “protection” tends to be overreaching at times; but what’s being done at the Olympics is brand “suppression.” Should brands that have somehow, in some way earned the right to have placement (either for a product sold, or someone proudly wearing their name) be banned simply because they don’t suit someone’s corporate interests?
August 20th, 2008 at 8:10 amSara says:
I heard about this ban on other advertisers on NPR. I then sent a tweet about it and got this response: http://twitter.com/gvoolympics/statuses/88087970 saying that is how exclusivity deals work. (Not sure if it is official)
But seriously, can you imagine people going around with tape in the U.S. or Europe?
August 20th, 2008 at 8:57 amBIG Kahuna says:
Wonder what happens to all those Americans with Harley Davidson tattoos? Didn’t I see one of our runners with a Batman tattoo (his nickname was Batman)? I know I saw one with a Superman tattoo…all violaters. Send them to the gallows! Slice off their flesh.
August 20th, 2008 at 9:14 amCarrie says:
The bullies! Coke does buy “love” and customers by having the big bucks to pay for “exclusive contracts. But it is nice to see that consumers can have a voice to make change happen…
August 20th, 2008 at 12:28 pmhttp://media.www.themacweekly.com/media/storage/paper1230/news/2006/01/27/News/Nyu-And.U.Michigan.Drop.Coke.Contract-2944878.shtml
http://badgerherald.com/news/2006/02/09/coke_loses_contracts.php
Gary says:
I agree that both activities can lead to nuttiness, but it’s two different things, maybe three.
I have no idea how athletes navigate that confused world of endorsement deals. They have a deal to wear and use certain products (which have logos on them), then go participate in events where their logo must be covered with tape. I understand why if Powerade sponsors an event, they don’t want to have athletes seen drinking Gatorade on the sidelines, but it still makes them look cheap and a little stupid. It only draws more attention when you see a piece of tape on clothing or a label torn off what is obviously a Gatorade bottle (you can tell by the shape). Personally, I wish athletes would say “I know this is the Powerade/Taco Bell track meet, but Gatorade is what I drink, and incidentally they pay me… if you want me to be there, let me know when you want to get real, because I’ll be wearing Gatorade stuff, sorry.”
The subset of craziness that is covering logos for NON-RELATED stuff (elevators? Is there an official elevator of the Olympic Games ™?) is just - beyond the pale. Nothing to say there, let’s move on.
Fans taking your logo and messing around with it is another matter - I think you’re conflating the two (2 1/2) ideas wrongfully. I can see both sides. Okay, practically, I know you can’t stop all of it. Problem is, people have lost their trademarks by making no effort to protect them. So I don’t see what choice you have but to try to protect your trademarks. Difference is, you can be nice about it - or not. GM runs full page ads in my industry rags all the time that say (and I am not making this up): If you use any of our brands, we’ll see you in court. More or less exact wording there. Makes me kinda hate GM, to be honest with you. OTOH, Lucas allows all kinds of parodies of Star Wars, but he’s well known for having some simple ground rules. Rule 1 - you can’t make money off his IP. So people perceive him as fair, and even helpful about it.
August 20th, 2008 at 1:47 pmBilly says:
Now that… my friends… is a heck of a blog post.
August 20th, 2008 at 6:57 pmCheryl Smith says:
You’re exactly right! Corporations, small businesses and non-profit organizations all need to be diligent about how the promote their brand internally. Otherwise, their message is distorted at best, confusing or ineffective in the worst cases.
Having said that, I think savvy marketers would welcome having others promote their brands.
I’m wondering if there are any downsides that we haven’t anticipated?
August 21st, 2008 at 6:29 amSteve Woodruff says:
I guess they’d break out the surface-to-air missles if a KLM jet flew overhead? Or make you go barefoot if you dared to step out in a pair of Docksiders? Idiots…
August 21st, 2008 at 6:33 amChris says:
This is actually much closer to home than you think. We were making folders for our company to hand in to prospective clients, and wanted the Greenville Chamber logo (among others) on the back. We were told no . . .
http://www.greenvillechamber.org/chamber/logo.aspx
August 21st, 2008 at 12:35 pmThe Worthwhile Blog » Blog Archive » Scrabulous: A Tragic Tale says:
[...] Jones over at Brains on Fire had a great blog post a little while back on this very subject. Companies are getting a little hyper-sensitive about [...]
September 4th, 2008 at 12:53 pmRecent Links Tagged With "cocacola" - JabberTags says:
[...] public links >> cocacola Say Hello to the Logo Police Saved by dyc999 on Wed 05-11-2008 The Lost viking yield of The CocaCola Company stocks is. Saved [...]
November 6th, 2008 at 8:34 am