BBC's New Logo

[beanheadmcginty]

The change might have been because the previous logo used the Gill sans font and they're terrified about the Daily Mail finding out what Eric Gill used to get up to with his sisters, daughters and pet dog.

[Thomas]

It's probably an apt time to bring back the classic '90s jingle of sheer funereal terror. The first brush with depression for many - responsible mental health preparation by a state broadcaster. Musically captures the sensation of looking at the silhouette of a house where a local oddball once hanged himself, or waking up alone in the footprint of a pylon. Nigel Kneale wishes he'd written anything approaching those nine plaintive notes.

The squares of the refurbished logo are too far apart.

[imitationleather]

It's probably an apt time to bring back the classic '90s jingle of sheer funereal terror. The first brush with depression for many - responsible mental health preparation by a state broadcaster. Musically captures the sensation of looking at the silhouette of a house where a local oddball once hanged himself, or waking up alone in the footprint of a pylon. Nigel Kneale wishes he'd written anything approaching those nine plaintive notes.

The squares of the refurbished logo are too far apart.

I have a lot of fondness for that '90s ident, even though it is indeed quite depressing. This chat has reminded me that I used to have a Doctor Who video that was so ruddy old it used this ident: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fq4ftiByb6M Vile.

[Ferris]

Probably not heard that jingle in 20 years!

It's the X Files music innit? The same high synth and compressed piano +reverb playing (to my ear?) something F or Am which I think would match the key for those loopy alien-botherers.

[Glebe]

[mothman]

The 90s jingle, it was used just a couple of years back when they used to do these "This Week On The BBC" sequence highlighting two or three things that had been on this week, usually but not always the highbrow stuff, and that could be seen on iPlayer.

[Blumf]

It's probably an apt time to bring back the classic '90s jingle of sheer funereal terror.

I know there's an extended Vaporwave mix of that somewhere, damned if I can find it.

General 80s TV soundscape which you may also like (includes the ever depressing TVam theme):
https://youtu.be/8BUHh7J6wHQ

[Cloud]

I like the 70s one the best

[Gurke and Hare]

The new logo makes for a worse favicon on the bookmarks bar.

[gilbertharding]

Considering the amount they'd spent, I'm very surprised to still have the old graphics for the iPplayer and Sounds apps on my phone.

Come on, the BBC - pull your finger out.

[Replies From View]

I like them.

Is it me, or do these powers combined spell out 'prick'?

[mothman]

"DRECK" maybe?

[studpuppet]

Is it me, or do these powers combined spell out 'prick'?

Looks like Jimmy Savile's right arm to me - those wandering fingers...

[Replies From View]

with a little bit of jeremy beadle added to the mix

[Beagle 2]

The 1970s BBC logo gives me an instant headache because it reminds me of the lettering on every shop sign in the dilapidated, concrete, piss and broken glass carpeted area of Manchester where my gran lived, which I was dragged around on alternate weeks in the 80s. And I always had a headache.

[dissolute ocelot]

The new logo makes for a worse favicon on the bookmarks bar.

The new main website logo/icon doesn't work when scaled down too much. It looks like 3 blurry greyish blobs in a browser. They should just have black squares if it's 16x16 or smaller, or else just use the first B (I can't remember what they did before but it was far more recognisable; the new one looks like some Chinese characters that have been shrunk beyond recognition).

[Norton Canes]

It just looks like a rotated version of the 'vertical ellipsis' icon

[chrispmartha]

I totally get that things like graphics need design. I get that they need to be 'refreshed' from time to time. I get that designers need paying (I am a designer).

I don't get where they get these (doubtless inaccurate, but still) figures for how much it all (apparently) costs. I'm in the wrong business.

I own a Branding Agency. Ti be fair the figures quoted will include the whole implementation of the rebrand - this can get into the hundreds of thousands for (relatively) small companies. It really boils my piss when people say how much?, for a logo?

Not a dig at you more of a general moan.

[paruses]

I own a Branding Agency. Ti be fair the figures quoted will include the whole implementation of the rebrand - this can get into the hundreds of thousands for (relatively) small companies. It really boils my piss when people say how much?, for a logo?

Not a dig at you more of a general moan.

What would be involved in the whole implementation? Genuinely interested as the "what, for a logo?" thing always gets thrown up.

[Icehaven]

I own a Branding Agency. Ti be fair the figures quoted will include the whole implementation of the rebrand - this can get into the hundreds of thousands for (relatively) small companies. It really boils my piss when people say how much?, for a logo?

Not a dig at you more of a general moan.

How much consideration do the clients (particularly high profile and/or publically funded ones) typically put into how much of the rebrand the customers/public will actually see though? I mean I get your point that there's a lot more to it than using a different font or changing a few icons, but given that's the only difference everyone else sees you can't blame them for thinking that. However much work has gone into it behind the scenes, if the visible result is minimal then that's what people are inevitably going to think it amounts to.

[gilbertharding]

What would be involved in the whole implementation? Genuinely interested as the "what, for a logo?" thing always gets thrown up.

In my (small scale) experience, it would have to include destroying stocks of headed stationery, recently ordered due to the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing. I guess some companies might have a fleet of vehicles which need rebranding. Doubtless Buzbyposter can recall when British Telecom ordered hundreds of new yellow vans in the early 90s, which were delivered just in time for someone to decide all their vehicles should be grey.

Meanwhile, the iPlayer app I have on my phone is STILL showing the old logo and graphics.

[steveh]

Think I read they're rolling out the rebrand over several months, presumably because that's cheaper and avoids stories in the press about wasting money.

[dissolute ocelot]

In my (small scale) experience, it would have to include destroying stocks of headed stationery, recently ordered due to the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing. I guess some companies might have a fleet of vehicles which need rebranding. Doubtless Buzbyposter can recall when British Telecom ordered hundreds of new yellow vans in the early 90s, which were delivered just in time for someone to decide all their vehicles should be grey.

It requires huge amounts of training and lots of meetings and documentation to tell people the exciting details. If you're requiring 10,000 people to take a couple of hours to "learn" about the new logo, that's easily £250k in salaries. And they all have to get a t-shirt or mug or something so they remember what the new logo looks like.

[chrispmartha]

How much consideration do the clients (particularly high profile and/or publically funded ones) typically put into how much of the rebrand the customers/public will actually see though? I mean I get your point that there's a lot more to it than using a different font or changing a few icons, but given that's the only difference everyone else sees you can't blame them for thinking that. However much work has gone into it behind the scenes, if the visible result is minimal then that's what people are inevitably going to think it amounts to.

with the BBC there will be a hell if a lot that the customer will see, but even if not if rhet are going to rebrand it can't be done half arsed otherwise there is no point.

One of the biggest things with the BBC rebrand is dropping a font that they have to pay a yearly license for using and that will be a huge amount, licensing fonts especially for a corporation like the BBC will be huge.

I do get it that people will think its a waste of money, I've even seen people from my own idustry posting on linkedin saying how much for a logo? Which toyally pissed me iff because they should know better than to cheapen their own industry.

[chrispmartha]

Think I read they're rolling out the rebrand over several months, presumably because that's cheaper and avoids stories in the press about wasting money.

It will also be a logistics thing, we often roll brands out over a few months because even in smaller companies it's not always logistically possible to switch everything over in one go.

I recently did a rebrand for a company which was rolled out over a year.

[holyzombiejesus]

Must be quite expensive to change the massive logos they have on their buildings too.

That's it. That's the post.

[Blumf]

...<industry insider stuff>...

What's the deal with fonts? Apparently part of the reason of the logo redo was to avoid using Gill Sans as they had to pay for it. Does that sound right?

[paruses]

I would also like to know how fonts work.

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

Fill it up with water and get the priest to bless it.

[gilbertharding]

I would also like to know how fonts work.

It's very similar to coffee. Lots of wankers with no clue, being performatively aghast at 'comic sans' because they've heard other people doing the same. "Ugh, look at the thickness of the descenders on that. And those serifs are *so* ugly," and you know they couldn't tell the difference between Helvetica and Berlin Sans.