AOL Unveils Weird New Brand
I am normally not averse to companies changing their brand identity. I’m not terribly nostalgic when it comes to graphic design, and am usually enthusiastic about new ideas and changing trends. However, AOL’s new brand identity puzzles me. Most notable is their decision to switch from an all-caps acronym to a single declarative: “Aol.” Am I meant to pronounce it as a word now? If so, how?
As for the logos, why didn’t someone tell me that all you had to do to create an arresting brand was to knock the name of your product/company out of some random stock photos and illustrations? I’m sure Wolff Olins knows something I don’t but, I’m sorry, this just feels lazy. Maybe I need to do less thinking inside the box and more thinking outside the …goldfish?
Hm.
Whatevs, Aol.
In their words: AOL Previews New Brand Identity for its Future as an Independent Content-Driven Company
Hat tip to Om Malik.
I don’t know what that pink thing is, but I know this: It’s gross. Also gross: throw-up brain tree. Thumbs down, Aol. (I’m pronouncing it like “owl,” by the way.)
I think the pink thing is melted wax dropped into water. Nothing says “uniquely dynamic content-driven company” like melted wax dropped into water.
I’m pronouncing it like the first two syllables of “aioli” but then I’m adding the sound of spit for the period. Hey, it worked for Victor Borge.
Was it Syfy who ushered in the era of embarrassing rebranding in which Aol. is now taking part or did all of this start with some other entity?
This actually raises an interesting question: What firm handled the SyFy rebrand? I wonder if that was also Wolff Olins’s handiwork.
Update: Nope. It was these guys.
I’m pronouncing it like “a-hole” without the “h” sound.
I think the pink blob looks like a brain severely deprived of oxygen for an extended period.
Mike, was it really Landor who handled the SyFy rebrand? I notice it’s not mentioned in their “Selected Cases” section. Could it really have been that embarrassing?