these suck
Ummm…so I was reading an article about America Online (AOL) – something about them getting a new logo and getting rebranded. There were images in the article of what the new logos would be..they sucked so bad I honestly thought it was a joke. An article put out by The Onion maybe? Alas – no – it was no joke. AOL really is going to use a variety of awful backgrounds for their new logo. To make matters worse, everything I have read makes it seem like the people in charge think it’s a great idea. How is it possible that ideas like this make it past first draft then have money put behind it while talented freelance designers who could come up with better design while in a coma go hungry?
The list of things that are wrong with the stuff in this early look above is nearly endless. I can’t believe they’ve gone public with the images. I really am baffled. What about the images above doesn’t say clip art? What’s with the period? The rationale for it in the article is total B.S. Is this really solid branding if the “Aol.” changes size, placement and is hard to read on the background images? I just don’t get it.
Oh well, you know what they say – if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em – so in the spirit of awful and outdated design ideas, here’s my submission:
they can’t be for real. dude, this is so very bad. it’s like the emperor’s new logo
Pingback: |I'm in utter disbelief