Hot Stuff
Win Before & After magazine!
Best tool since MacGyver's pocketknife
Forums > Critiques
Written by Terri Stone on November 23, 2009
Here are six versions of AOL's new logo:
They're not six drafts of the logo -- they're all final versions, all different.
An AOL press release described the new logo as "uniquely dynamic" and a "simple, confident logotype, revealed by ever-changing images. It’s one consistent logo with countless ways to reveal."
Wow.
Wolff Olins developed the new identity. Karl Heiselman, Wolff Olins' CEO, says, “Historically brand identity has been monolithic and controlling, little more than stamping a company name on a product. AOL is a 21st century media company, with an ambitious vision for the future and new focus on creativity and expression, this required the new brand identity to be open and generous, to invite conversation and collaboration, and to feel credible, but also aspirational."
I must at least give AOL and Wolff Olins props for taking a giant, massive, elephantine risk.
Do you think this ephemeral logo will succeed?
nope.
FAIL. WAY too ephemeral. Too cerebral. And way too darn hard to read. And for me, AOL (excuse me Aol) is not even relevant in my world.
Re "nope"
That's "Aol." to you, buddy! No, seriously, the dot is part of the name. Apparently this is a new trend, but I wasn't hip to the groove.
Terri Stone
Why not?
I'm interested in watching what happens. And really, the logotype doesn't change. They're just setting it on different background images. That isn't terribly unusual.
Not impressed
Are you saying they will use one of the six at different times / places? MTV has done something similar.
Frankly, I just don't find the visuals particularly interesting ro memorable or symbolic or ... much of anything.
nope
Fail. i weighed in on this at blog.cottervisual.com. I think they are in for an awakening. adaptive logos or not, this is bad design all around.
All things to all people?
Yes, the logotype is static, but it's also not strong. And if the images behind the type change constantly, that may reflect the diverse content Aol. is hoping it will have, but.... Being all things to all people almost NEVER works.
Terri Stone
Editor in Chief, CreativePro.com
It's the Typography...
The logo's typographic rendering of "Aol." The backgrounds are just wallpaper.
Metaphorically, I'd say they're trying to obscure the true Aol. by camouflaging it with these insipid backgrounds. The one obvious wallpaper they aren't useing is the grill from an Edsel.
On a positive note, it cheers me up somewhat to realize that even the "geniuses" running a mega-corp can make a boneheaded move like TimeWarner did when they absorbed Aol. in the first place.
Huh?
Forget the ephemeral aspect. Start with Logo Basics 101 - can't read 'em.
AOL
They should have used hatchwise, haha.
Cataclysmic thud.
I'm all for a dynamic, multi-use logo, but this is so amateur & unmemorable it completely fails in its purpose. Looks like the results of a junior high school student contest (and not the winning entries!)
Lol.
Subject says it all.
plain sucks
plain sucks
Why bother?
If this is the kind of thinking and design that big corps pay hard money for then why am I still sweating over making sure that my own designs work? I'm going to start slapping insipid type on whatever s**t I happen to come across while cleaning the floor and call it cutting edge. Sad, sad.
they need a TOTAL change
There are all horrible. Unreadable and amatuerish.
AOL needs a new branding, the name AOL itself is tarnished and dated. A new logo will help not help them prosper in this day and age, it's too late for that.
Seriously?
I had to check the date to make sure this wasn't a joke. It isn't a joke, is it? Sure looks like one to me :)
It's Rubbish - will not succeed
Amatuer looking for sure. It flat looks like LITTER. Options are endless and this is garbage with a brand name on it. Wad it up! Try Again! Start Over!
FAIL, pure and simple.
There's an ongoing discussion at LinkedIn's Designers Talk group (http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers&discussionID=10121304&gid=92232&commentID=8649259&trk=view_disc).
Wow. That's about as bad a misstep as I've seen in a long time.
Uninspired typography, cheesy cliché images, no message or direction...
How Sad
Poor aol AOL Aol Aol. ??????
Poor Execution of a Bad Idea
Their primary examples remind me of the page in every usage and style guide of how not to use a logo.
AOL =
Awful Obnoxious Logos
One saving grace?
At least there isn't a drop shadow under "Aol." -
Your kidding, right?
So you slap some letters over some stock images and call it a logo? And you get paid HOW much for it?
Just awful.
Is there anyone....
..besides the people who dreamed up this monstrosity that think it's good?
Missed the mark
This approach worked for MTV, but the ever-changing logo was the type itself, not the background. And putting a period after one cap and two lowercase letters really adds to the confusion. Is it an acronym, a statement, or did the 'O' hole fall out and roll over to the 'L'? Kudos for exploration and pushing the envelope, but this is poor execution, amateurish, and lacks purpose and logic.
My eyes are angry! And all
My eyes are angry! And all that wasted money on Student Education loans...Argh!
Oh, my!
Perhaps this is Aol.'s strategy of avoiding a slow trickling kind of death through instantaneous branding suicide. Like much of the new branding I've seen lately, this reeks of the emperor's new clothes. At the risk of once again being the resident grump here, the new Aol. look is not branding and the designs do not meet the requirements of logos. There seems to be an effort to delegitimize the traditional theories behind logo design and branding. But I have to wonder whether our worldly expectations and perceptions have changed so much that the old standards no longer apply, or whether it is more a matter of youthful arrogance at the "old ways" or, simply, that the youthful practitioners in our field really don't know what constitutes a successful logo or branding campaign.
Actually...
a drop shadow would make the letters much more readable in a couple of those images...
Fire your designer
Besides ignoring some basic design principals when it comes to branding, this just demonstrates a lack of knowledge of applying some kind of product differentiation. I found the explanation for these visual goobers just a poor rationalization. This smacks of 'high' art, not communications graphics. Who's foolin' who here? As far as the comment on modern branding being monolithic and 'controlling'...Pish Posh! sayeth I. This is fine age for corporate branding and I see plenty of fine logos and collateral that deserve accolades. In sum, I petition AOL...Aol...AoL... or whomever..whatever, to fire the designer... now.
Aol.
Lol.
Re Terri's article in Creativeprose
I'm pretty sure AOL bought Time Warner, not the other way round.
yuck
Looks like somebody threw up. Photo objects for a logo, really? Did they hire a 12-year-old to design these?
How Much Did This Cost?
I think the universal opinion = Horrid.
Who's the agency/designer behind these? Was it crowdsourced? How much is Aol. paying for this crap.
laughable
But really, was AOL ever respectable? They were the clip-on tie of the internet. Not so surprising, their love of clip art.
Aol. So how is that prononuced?
A-ol(e)?
WTF
not easy to read nor fun to look at...in a word, amateur.
The worst agency logo EVER
What have we come to? This is generic crap, I agree with postings above and think I'm getting in too late to really add anything to the conversation. However this design is so insulting and poorly done that I had to write something...in summary BLEAH!
Already.outdated
Isn't NBC using the same sort of idea with all their commercials? Using the ever present dot? All of the graphics on their website have it too (nbc.com).
The top menu bar is: shows. schedule. games. shop. watch. spotlight.
The television commercials use such tags/graphics as new.heroes and new.jay leno
Not even out of the box yet, and Aol. has come in second place in their own "originality."
Symbol
Reminds me of a symbol in the chart of elements...not a lot of impact - even with the photo and graphic backgrounds. I think the GP (general public) will not get it at all...
bad = interesting ?
look at how many of us just HAD to post a comment...
The challenge....
of trying to "reinvent" the AOL brand with a new look would be fun. It is strange that the designers have done so little with that great opportunity. Let's see where it goes, but my gut tells me this get ash canned in about a year-and-a-half.
yah, got our attention...but
not for very good reasons. Google has done this kind of "change" successfully with its search engine page logo (and some brilliant ideas were submitted) but only after its logo was deeply imprinted. this screams, "VAGUE!"
Playing us all
I just hope that this pre-release of the identity is the marketing team trying to great an internet buzz, and that on Dec 10th we will see a cohesive usable identity. Of course this is coming from the same people who brought us London 2012.
I like the top right one best
Except for the weird lettering and punctuation, I think the top right logo is a good choice. It resembles water swirling down the drain, which is where AOL has been headed for years!
Bad
I can only surmise that they have fired their PR team and their graphic design team in an effort to save money over the past year. This is bad. On first sight, I thought it was a watermark to protect images which was completely unneccesary, as nobody would steal them anyway.
maybe they meant for them to be stickers???
Certainly these are not logos. They are stickers. AOL just made a big boo boo.
But what's with the rubberband ball sticking it's tongue out? Is the pink thing cauliflower or a brain?
maybe they meant for them to be stickers???
Certainly these are not logos. They are stickers. AOL just made a big boo boo.
But what's with the rubberband ball sticking it's tongue out? Is the pink thing cauliflower or a brain?
new logo designs
Looks like somebody was guessing and not designing.... none of them has any significance -- unless the real meaning is that AOL is no longer significant itself!
Awful... all of them.
stickers is the right
stickers is the right word...for kids.
But look at the interest they're getting already.
Timetable
I think we'll see the end of racism before we see the end of this sort of "emperor's New Clothes" identity scams. Who designs this rubbish? And who's stupid enough to pay them?
Can we just do designers worldwide one little bit of service and not refer to these as "logos"? They are nothing of the sort, not even close. They are type, spit out and superimposed on stock photos.
Spare us from this dreck, please!
AOL goes AWOL
If the NY Post wrote a headline for this ...