If you are a typography, logo design or branding junkie, you are well aware that Gap recently launched a redesigned logo on their website.
I will spare you my judgment, however few have been so kind to the brand in the social media world.
The last time I checked my Radian6 feed (5:17 PM), the amount of mentions for the term “Gap Logo” had reached 4332 in the blogoshpere and twitterverse.
Most people simply reposted or retweeted the sentiment of others, but a number of people voiced their opinion directly. While Beyond Analytics favors real human analysis over automated tonality, for the sake of time the automated tool kicked out a number that bordered on 80% negativity toward the Gap logo. The responses ranged from people feeling that the logo looked like it was created in PowerPoint, to concerns about the cliché use of Helvetica, to flat out hatred.
Top word associations include – fail, bad, horrible, awful and hate… not a lot of love.
Detractors were also not soft on the topic of the gradient box used in the logo, gradient being a key point of contention. The box alone had its own response set, with most feeling that it gave the logo a pharmaceutical or techie look.
Regardless of the sentiment, the logo redesign has certainly charged up the design community. One snarky twitter feed started tweeting on behalf of the logo. Additionally, an online re-design contest sparked 155 new logo options in a single day. Also, if you haven’t already went for it, you can gap logo (or craplogo) yourself.
I don’t think that 4000+ reactions to the logo amounts to mass market revolt, but it will be interesting to watch how the brand and consumers outside of the design community react. Is any press good press?
I must admit, this is the most I have thought about the Gap since 1992.
Yes, any press is good press if it raises awareness (and no criminal act has been alleged or proven). As you stated, Eric, “I must admit, this is the most I have thought about the Gap since 1992.”
The logo uproar died down quickly because Gap dropped the new logo shortly after the online impromptu vote. So, I doubt that Gap received much benefit from a limited awareness spike. Gap might have gained more recognition if the controversy was allowed more “playing time.” The game is over if one side gives up.