Tuesday, April 14, 2015

Hillary’s campaign logo: An unfortunate early misstep

As someone who has spent a career in the marketing/design world, I’ve seen some great logos and some ghastly ones. One thing about creating a logo is you have to think long and hard about all of the possible connotations of your image, because it’s going to be scrutinized by everyone and their mothers. Here are two examples of logos that somehow got through the approval process without the appropriate amount of scrutiny:

At the top of the page is the logo for Hillary Clinton’s Presidential campaign. Maybe it’s a subject I’m too close to, but I don’t know how anyone can look at her logo and not be reminded of the attacks on the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001. I understand the intent of the logo, moving forward, progress and all of that, but it boggles the mind that no one on her team said, “Hey, doesn’t that remind you of the World Trade Center buildings?"

Symbols are important communications tools both in their obvious connotations and the deeper, subconscious meanings that they convey. Think of the power of the simple cross or a swastika. The popular Da Vinci Code books and movies were all about the age-old mysteries of symbols. It’s unfortunate that Hillary’s campaign team missed the troubling implications in her logo. Not the best first step on the road to the White House.

1 comment:

Unknown said...

Hello John,

I just found and read your amazing post from April 2015, "Hillary’s campaign logo: An unfortunate early misstep".

I thought your observations very astute and the examples so insightful. I've started collecting on-line examples related to your hypothesis and would like to send my collection to you as it would be interesting to discuss.


Patrick Tobin