New Skittles Website redesign – Oh Dear, Oh Dear

Skittles have ‘redesigned’ their website and gone all ‘Web two-Oh’ with a Twitter page being the main basis.

I say; ‘Web-Two-Oh Dear Oh Dear’.

Using live social tools to promote your brand in this way is dangerous… Red rag to a bull. Cue random stream of abusive tweets to subvert the idea and push back against this corporate use of a social tool.

Consequently their homepage has now filled up with comments such as:

“Rats have yellow teeth from eating skittles.”
and
“I heard that when Obama comes, he comes #skittles”

WHEN WILL THEY LEARN??? ?

Yahoo did it with Wii by linking to the Flickr Tag Wii, thus flouting Creative Commons rules. The response? Users crafting anti-Wii/Yahoo images and tagging the ‘Wii’ so that they appear on the campaign site.

As Mr T would say: “I pity the fool.”

If you click ‘Friends’ in the navigation you get sent to a Facebook page.

Quick.. I’d better friend up on FB.

Urghhh and Yawn.

Apparently it’s Agency.com who are behind this.

Well, if it is.. you’re credentials just plummeted. This is lazy, weak, predictable and shows a massive ‘misunderestimating‘ of the community.

And before you start… yes yes.. It does beg the question ‘Was this such a bad idea?’ and the statement ‘No publicity is bad publicity.’

But still, risky right..?

Tesco creating ‘Eco-Towns’ – Building Demand – Filth

By Warren Hutchinson

Tailwind gets just a little bit protesting/activist today.

In a little village just outside Cambridge, on the Cambridge / Essex border is a picturesque little place called Hinxton. Just nearby is the village of Great Chesterford, Shelford and the medieval market town of Saffron Walden.

What surrounds these quaint and very old little villages is agricultural land. There are one or two A-Roads, A1301 and A505, that link the villages and of course the M11 makes it’s way past Duxford en route to the M25, but largely this is a beautiful and tranquil part of the world. I know because it’s where my wife is from and we’re often up there with her folks and siblings.

View Larger Map

Tesco, along with Jarrow Investments want to ruin it by building a housing development there.

Image taken from the Stop Hanley Grange Website.

They call it an ‘Eco-Town’ and use phrases such as ‘Hanley Grange is a new type of community. With sustainability and respect for the environment at its heart’.

Sorry, but how is it conducive to sustainability when you build on raw agricultural land?

Idiots.

Furthermore:

“Hanley Grange will feature around 8,000 new homes, 40% of which are affordable, with an opportunity to deliver a further 3,000 homes in the future. This will enable it to sustain a secondary school, up to five primary schools, a health centre and a range of community facilities, shops and public spaces.”

Ah, sustainability again. Sustain a school that wouldn’t have been required had they not built the houses.

Fools.

Who are Jarrow Investments? Well:

“Jarrow Investments has a long-standing commercial agreement with Tesco to work with them and other landowners to take forward the proposals for Hanley Grange. One of the requirements set out by the government for eco-towns is that they should provide a good range of facilities, including a secondary school, a medium scale retail centre, good quality business space and leisure facilities. We hope a Tesco store will play a part in delivering that retail centre and are delighted they are involved as Tesco an industry leader in the development of sustainable supermarkets.”

‘The development of sustainable supermarkets’?

Are they serious?

Tesco are the purveyors of fine intensively farmed chicken if you remember Hugh Fearnly-Whittingstall’s ‘Chicken Run’.

(By the way, check out his site for information on the intensive farming industry, it’s an eye-opening read.)

They’re not sustainable.

This makes my blood boil. I don’t like Tesco very much. I don’t like them for all the reasons most people don’t; squeezing the suppliers, ousting local businesses, selling mucky, intensively farmed meat and poultry ‘2 for a fiver‘.

Hanley Grange is to provide homes for between 8 and 11 thousand people. See a map of the proposed site here:

Doing so is going to wreck the area and possibly close historic Duxford airfield, stopping the flight of Spitfires.

I think there should be more Spitfires flying, not less.

Taken from the Stop Hanley Grange Website:

1. The wrong location
   This is a resurrected planning application South Cambridgeshire District Council has already REJECTED and has chosen Northstowe as a new town – this should be our eco town.
2. Enough is enough
   We already have one of the biggest house building programmes in the country. South Cambridgeshire is committed to building 23,000 homes. We don’t need any more.
3. We don’t have the infrastructure
   Our roads are under huge strain now. The Liverpool Street/Cambridge line lacks capacity and station car parks are full. The Citi7 bus is regularly held up due to the volume of traffic.
4. Destroying greenfield land
   You don’t improve the environment by building on miles of high quality grade II farmland.
5. Undermining local democracy
   The “eco-town” is being imposed by ministers and bureaucrats in Whitehall, subverting the normal planning process. We believe that local people should decide through our elected representatives. It’s a question of democracy and accountability.
6. An ECO-CON, not an eco-town
   The carbon neutral house hasn’t been designed yet. Thousands more cars on our roads aren’t carbon neutral either. The plan just won’t work.

It’s one of 15 sites across the country proposed for development of an ‘Eco-town’.

Apart from all the usual anti-Tesco angles and the fact that this is an ill-coceived development in the first place, what about the following?

- jobs
- access
- water

What I disticntly dislike about this is the idea that Tesco build these places with a single view to provide intense demand for a store it hasn’t yet built.

This, people, is dark strategy in play.

There is a large Tesco in Saffron Walden (yes, of course – just on the edge of town) and a Waitrose in the town. There is a market and local butchers actually within the town itself.

Visit the STOP HANLEY GRANGE website and sign the petition by June 30th 2008. Or better still

Sign petition at No 10.

Unilever Switches Off Dove Forums

I had a reply to my last post from Jamie who is the web editor for Greenpeace, saying that ever since Greenpeace launched their campaign the forums on Dove’s ‘Campaign for Real Beauty’ site have been closed.

COME ON UNILEVER!!!

Engage positively!!!

This is lame and you’re looking like fools.

This smacks of the fake blogging incident by L’Oreal brand Vichy who failed to understand (at first) how to engage with this level of digital subversion. L’Oreal turned it round by positively engaging with the blogging community to create a dialogue.

Unilever have put up their rather un-inspiring, dry, content free retort and are putting their fingers in their ears and saying la la la. I think they might be sitting up there in Unilever Towers looking out the window saying things like “Have they gone yet?” or “Today’s news is tomorrow’s chip wrapping.”

Silly Unilever.

Well done Greenpeace.

It’d be great if you could look at some other ecologically naughty brands / campaigns and entertain us all with some more highlighted irony to deliver important messages.

Beauty? It’s what’s on the inside that counts. What’s inside Dove is ugly.

Unilever’s ‘digital reaction’ to Greenpeace Protest

By Warren Hutchinson

The Greenpeace Orang-Utan’s struck Unilever on Monday and within an hour the blogosphere was rampant with rampaging Orang-Utans, videos, images, stories.

As ever ‘Transparency Tyranny‘ is rife and digital is the driving nemesis of corporation x.

What are Unilever doing in response? And how are they going to engage in this digital onslaught, this citizen journalist propagation and ironic spin of ‘real beauty’?

I’m really interested in the strategy behind all of this and how it unfolds. In the inception of the ‘campaign for real beauty’ I wonder if they thought about defensive strategies should stories (which they MUST have suspected) such as this emerge.

On the Unilever site there is a front page news item titled ‘Sustainable Palm Oil’. Click through and you see a video from their SVP of Communications and Sustainability starting with a statement that:

“We have great sympathy with what Greenpeace are trying to achieve, they are drawing attention to a really important issue” – Gavin Neath, SVP Communications and Sustainability

I find the role of SVP ‘Communications’ (Spin) and ‘Sustainability’ incongruous, but that’s another issue.

Unilever are part of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil, or RSPO for short, and unsurprisingly they are playing up to this. Unilever claim to be instrumental in setting up the roundtable for sustainable palm and carrying it forward.

The transcript can be found here.

The response is a step, I’d rather see something directly relating and acknowledging the Greenpeace efforts, an alignment of sorts. They are playing it down, but not explicitly responding.

The ‘Dove in the News’ site is even wetter. Dove is all over the news, but it is not showing here.

Cue fingers in the ears – “la la la”:

The problem is, in order to hear Unilever’s point of view you have to mobilise yourself to go and see their site, navigate and watch a polished corporate video.

I can’t, yet, find any level of engagement by Unilever with the user-generated, mobilised, chatteriffic sphere of blogs, video sites and social networks. Searches for ‘Greenpeace, Unilever, Palm Oil’ only result in links to sites siding with the Greenpeace effort and not Unilever.

Designing a strategy for organic search traffic is required or else people will simply miss Unilever’s point.

I had a quick scan through the Facebook groups and found lots of Unilever corporate groups for ‘Graduates’ and ‘Management Schemes’ but UNSURPRISINGLY I found the Facebook group ‘Dove: Not so clean’.

Okay – it has 12 members so far.

Corporations are really uncomfortable with this stuff and they continue to ignore dealing with it.

And in closing, the final statement by the interviewer:

“Gavin Neath – thank you very much indeed”

smells horribly corporate and reeks of Aunty (The BBC for non-UK readers).

London 2012 – Challenge Yourself

A new aspect of the London 2012 web offering came online this morning and it’s a feature that is about inspiring participation in the brand.

Given that the Games is about being the best you can be, about being Olympic, the ‘Join In’ feature of the new site is about setting yourself a challenge for the future.

I think it taps into the spirit of the Games ina really nice way and starts a journey that London will go through over the next 5 years. Despite the criticism levelled at the identity, this is where the participation in London’s Games begins.

There’s a whole lot more to go on over time, so keep checking in.

So, challenge yourself and join in.

London 2012 – “My kid could have done that”

Day 2 and the viriol is still rolling concernig the new London 2012 identity and brand system.

I’ve seen coverage of the new Olympic London 2012 identity blazed across front pages, on the news and on the radio. Everyone is talking about it. So is this a bad thing? Is all PR ‘good’ PR?

I certainly think so.

It takes a while for the supporters to emerge and I’m starting to see supporting signs here, here, here and here signs that this identity will gain traction. I said yesterday that dissatisfaction and resentment always air more readily than satisfaction and support and this has been very apparent.

Comments include:

• “Of all the cities that are “would-be” hosts of the Olympics, only London have the balls to pull something like that off, and they have.”
• Like a lot of people, I didn’t like this when I first saw it; I thought about posting but I didn’t. But I kept thinking about it today, and the more I thought about it, the more it grew on me.
• I love how it works as a system. I love that its brash and crazy and risk-taking and young. And maybe its those qualities – which are often just as much a part of the Olympics as good sportmanship and acheivement – that speaks to my own favorite Olympic “moments…” The Jamaican bobsled team (I was a kid and I loved them that year and cried when they crashed), the first time snowboarding came to the Olympics… And I do think as time goes on it will take on the other, time-honored qualities of The Olympic Spirit.

Of course there are a myriad of detractors, but John Snow (a very credible news reader here in the UK) has warned us though‘Be careful, it will grow on you’.

He’s right. Or at least for my experience of the brand he’s right.

I remember seeing it for the first time and thinking “Oh. Okay. Urmmm. Wow. That’s different”. But it has grown on me. Now I really like it. I’m sticking up for it. I’m sticking my head up and saying “I support it”.

Personally I’m a little takenaback by the lack of support from the design community who usually berate everything for playing to the status quo. This identity certainly doesn’t do that. SO I expect some more emerging and high-profile supporters soon.

My favorite comment concerns the perceived ease at which these things are created; “MY kid could have done that” has chimed out on radio programs, television news and in the papers.

Well, great.

If your “kid could have done that” then that means it’s simple. It’s uncomplicated.

And simplicity is one of the most complicated things to achieve in design particularly in a spac where the identity has to work on tickets, billboards, clothing, signage etc etc. Also, it has to work with various sponsors on the side of cups, in newspaper adverts and so on.

This site provides 10 reasons for loving the new Olympic identity and adds that if your “kid could have done that, then get them to send in their resume”. They go on to point out that some of the best brand lock-ups are simple such as the Christian Cross (two lines) and the Mercedes badger (three lines and a circle).

This prompted me to think about the comments that criticise the logo for not being literal enough. Comments such as:

• “It doesn’t represent London”
• “It doesn’t represent sport”
• “It doesn’t contain red, white and blue”

I’d bet my house that if the logo was any combination of those things, a London landmark with some sporting gesture woven in, rendered in our national colours then we’d hear comments of “Try harder”, “Unoriginal”, “London is more unique than this” etc.

This brand system has to be reognisable at 10×10 pixels and at 100×100 ft. This is a brand system that provides a massive amount of scope for ‘play’. Expect to see bright coloured, angular forms across everything.

Love it or hate it. It will be plastered across London in various forms and I’m sure you will recognise it when you see it.

Response to the London 2012 brand

Wow.

That was the network effect in full, errrm, effect. At the time of writing some 11750 people have signed a petition stating:

We, the undersigned, call on the London Olympic committee to scrap and change the ridiculous logo unveiled for the London 2012 Olympics.

Whilst over on the BBC 606 website there have been some 2799 comments, and very few of them are complementary.

Now, before you carry on reading, I want you to go and watch these 2 videos. It will take a few minutes of your time. 5 max. Then we can carry on.

1. Video 1 – An animation aimed at depicting the energy of the brand
2. Video 2 – The ‘brand video’ aimed at depicting the qualities of the brand

---

Watched them…?

Good. Now we have a little context which most of the petitioners probably have no interest in attaining.

How do you feel?

Put aside the fact that the logo/lock-up/identity is super-crazy-manic and concentrate on how you feel about what you just saw.

Do phrases such as ‘rubbish’, ‘obvious’, ‘disgraceful’ and the like come to mind? Or do you feel a little bit charged, a little bit hopeful?

I’ve been working on this project since December and I’ve been working with the involved agencies and of course the London Organising Committee and I have to say that, for me, this brand works. Or at least it will work once we get past the initial cynacism and reaction. It embodies the energy, the vibrancy and the difference that this Olympic vehicle is hopefully going to be about and I’m writing this post as my way of saying to the teams I’ve worked with ‘Great job’.

It certainly inspired and stimulated a reaction, we’re all participating in this one and thanks to the network effect everyone is included.

The double-edged sword of web 2.0 in full swing.

Brands are not just logos of course, so today’s reaction is to an image. Further, I suspect that most people who have signed the petition or voiced their disapproval haven’t yet explored the story or the videos I’ve linked to and have been harbouring resentment ever since London won the opportunity to host.

It’s true that dissatisfaction and resentment always air more readily than satisfaction and support, but today did surprise me somewhat. I suspected that there would be a body of responses in the vein of ‘I don’t get it’, ‘My 5 year old could do better’, ‘What a waste of money’ etc because these things are always levelled at identities of this nature.

I wonder why people feel the need to expunge such vitriol when in doing so they are dismanteling the need for an emblem of hope, of change of being the best you can be, of being Olympic. It’s not about what it looks like, it’s about what it stands for and that’s what I think hasn’t yet been understood.

Over the next 5 years we’ll see exactly what this means, we’ll feel the experience of London 2012 and we’ll see change happen.

I’m hopeful. I’m confident. I’ve seen the people at London 2012 at work and I for one believe in their passion to do things differently.

But then, that is just my opinion and I’m just throwing my hat into the ring of network effect.

The company I work for didn’t develop the identity, we delivered the range of London 2012 websitea. But I say this not because I want to distance myself from the furor surrounding the identity but because actually I’m quite jealous that were not more closely aligned with this controversy. Our team have done a fantastic job in taking an incredibly challenging brand world and rolling it out as an accessible website given the logo, colour palette, typography and I think it achieves almost everything we wanted to.

It’s clear, legible, bright, energetic and engaging.

But I have to hold my hat off to the team at Wolf Olins and to Locog for trying something so daring, something so brave. Particularly given that in many sense as a design challenge developing Olympic brands is pretty much a poison chalice as everyone seems to love berating it, whatever has been done.

This is brave work particularly given how precious the Olympics is to people and particularly to Londoners at this present time.

Compare it to other Olympic marks of the past. They are dull, meaningless, formulaic and uninsprational, inunispiring, non-inclusive and not particularly stimulating.

.

Click here to see them close-up.

Beijing is the next host city and their identity is about celebrating China and about Chinese culture. A statement on their websites says:

Every emblem of the Olympics tells a story. The Beijing 2008 Olympic Games emblem “Chinese Seal, Dancing Beijing” is filled with Beijing’s hospitality and hopes, and carries the city’s commitment to the world.

It’s all about Beijing and that kind of inward looking presentation wouldn’t befit London. Largely because London is a city of cultural diversity and is overtly outward facing but also beacuse London sees itself as a world stage. Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s very appropriate for Beijing. I like it, particularly the Fuva who are there to carry a message of friendship and peace — and good wishes from China — to children all over the world.

Argue the toss about whether or not this brand delivers that, but I say it delivers a statment of intent – that this is going to be different and that this is about taking part. You can say one thing, this has not been designed to sit smartly on a polo shirt or coffee mug. In the context of Olympic branding history it screams change.

Right on.

The brand story is about passion, inspiration, participation and stimulation.

I watch those videos and I feel that. I watched them with my wife and she felt that too. Idon’t mind saying that I felt emotional in a good way. It was lump in the throat stuff and I’m proud to be part of it.

By the time the Games arrives, everyone should fel proud because everyone will have the chance to join in.

I hope that everyone feels something when they see those videos and that they start to consider that this is an emblem for something and that bashing it is like bashing that person riding the bike, the granny and her karate, the kid and the horse.

Let the discussion continue.

London 2012 – Brand Launch

If you are interested you can watch the videos online:

Video 1 – Annimation
Video 2 – Brand Story
So… what do you think.?

[Xposted: Frankandpat]

London 2012 Brand Launch Day

If you’ve been to the London 2012 website and registered, today at 11 a.m. you will be able to see an exclusive preview of the new brand identity.

Yesterdays answer will have led you to Alfie’s Blog, the founder and seasoned blogger from Moblog (that’s a posting in itself).

You can see the final video about ‘Stimulation’ here.

BTW – I would have posted the videos directly into this site, but couldn’t copy them to Youtube.

London 2012 – Clue 4, Answer to Clue 3

Yesterday’s was a toughy, but I eventually found London 2012 on Facebook. There is also a presence on Bebo and on MySpace, but seeing as it’s notoriously difficult to find anything on MySpace, Facebook was my success.

At first I tried looking for Seb Coe or Ken Livingston, David Beckham even, but to no avail.

Urgh, I visited David Beckham’s MySpace page, but luckily it isn’t really his unless he’s from Darlington.

Crafty.

Anyway,the 4th clue:

Day 4: Stimulation
Which mobile and web busybody is stimulated by his work and the weird wide web?

Or I suggest you visit this site.

Answer later.

[Xposted: Frankandpat]