Thursday, 6 December 2007

By any other Logo it would Smell as Sweet...

How attached are we to logos? You will know doubt recall the storm in a tea cup over the transformation of the Conservative party logo, swapping a forearm holding a blazing blue torch for an arty, modern, green tree. Many at the time would have liked for the tree to be torched, but most have now come to terms with the new identity, the tree 'grew' on them if you will. But at the time there was a sense of outrage among some in the party who felt this re-branding exercise undertaken by David Cameron threatened to dilute the core beliefs and message of the party, and that the party logo had been needlessly changed to promote the new green politics Cameron was focusing on. As unfounded as those accusations may or may not be; it illustrates that changing the symbol of an organisation can provoke a relatively passionate response. No doubt when the Labour party eventually changes it logo from a red rose to Gordon Browns fist or perhaps even a compact disc with a big question mark embellished over it…there will be a certain level of discontent.

However the proposal to change the logo of the Students Union here at Keele did not cause too much shaking of heads and sighs at the Student Representative Council two weeks ago. It’s hard to become attached to an organisations logo when that organisation hardly every uses it. It’s quite possible today to walk around and in the Union have no idea of what the KUSU logo is. Another reason for not many students having any attachment to the KUSU emblem is because, while a blazing torch represented liberty, a weird green and black diamond shaped knot is slightly more cryptic…maybe if it was a purple shaped pint glass, students would have more affection for it and be more clear as to what it stood for.

So when a motion was brought forward suggesting the logo is reviewed and changed, I personally was very welcoming. Redesigning the logo could potentially be a momentous and exciting event involving the entire student body. Concourse and KUBE Radio could publicise a campus wide competition, where students design logos which they feel symbolise their Union. Obviously you would get some entries that overemphasise the drinking element of the union, which is perhaps sadly the only thing KUSU is for some students: a 'watering hole.' As important as the social aspect of KUSU is perhaps there would be entries which illustrate the inclusiveness, political and activist sides to the Union as well as the drinking/social part. And it is in entries such as these that perhaps a logo could be found in which every student could look at and identify their Union experience within it.

Unfortunately on Tuesday 4th December the SRC was told that KUSU marketing is already commissioning a major research project, including questionnaires and focus groups, the result of which will be three different concepts for a new logo, which the student body will have a chance to vote on at a Union General Meeting towards the end of this academic year. The estimated cost of this process, and presumably the implementation of any new logo, is expected to be a figure no more that £1000.

Although students will be asked to take part in the research if they so wish, I must say that it is a shame that a campus wide competition was not considered by those in the Union. Ultimately it would be cheaper to have a logo design in house, the publicity costs and adverts on KUBE Radio would be minimal, and surely out of our entire student populace there is someone with enough talent to professionally design a new logo?

Whether this signals KUSU marketing not having any faith in the student body, or whether it genuinely feels this is the best course for a logo redesign, I would argue that a great opportunity to get the whole campus pepped up and involved in a competition and perhaps take some interest in their Union was been missed. If the Union truly does belong to the Students, then the entire process of how the Union is symbolised and presents itself should be in their hands, and their hands alone.

Joseph Kiernan
Executive Chairman, NKCF

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

The £1,000 is for the redesign process, any new logo implementation would cost a lot more than that!

Unknown said...

I'm all in favour of a new logo, so long as it really means something to students, and stands the test of time.

Hopefully we'll get a fair degree of choice in the new look.

Anonymous said...

Completely agree, I think that an on-campus design competition would have been much better!

Anonymous said...

Sadly we are getting neither. The deign process is being sourced out to a third party company and given that the complaint regarding the current one is that it does not conform with the current branding, I presume the remit for the new design will be very small so as to fit in with the rest of the mediocre branding.

Likewise we are only getting three desins to choose from, there was no mention of rejecting all three. It would seem to be a case of we get a choice of one of the three the marketting departmnt will be changing it too, wiothout any consideration for a full on rejection.

Anonymous said...

Very sad news indeed, how can a logo mean anything to Students if they have so little say in the process.

It does seem marketing has more sway over the Union and its direction than I originally thought.