New BBC Logo

[brioalex]

BBC:
“We are simply using our own font – which we own the intellectual rights to – to tidy up the blocks when we update content or BBC products.

It would be wrong to suggest that the costs of the design of the blocks was significant.”

It looks like this is the official stance on the new BBC logo. Definitely created in-house to save costs in the long term with a font they own. And 'tidy up' is how they're justifying the design of the updated blocks which also suggests a phased update starting from this Autumn.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/bbc-defends-lo...11812.html

But only 2 years ago when BBC News was reithed, the BBC denied that the same thing would happen to the logo, because it's trademarked and the letters BBC inside of the logo are considered shapes instead of text, so the so called ''font licensing'' does not even apply to the logo itself! As I said before does this mean that the Beeb has kept paying for ''font licensing''for 2 more years after reith was introduced? If this is the case then why wait 2 full years to reithise the logo. This makes no sense!

Absolutely, It’s very strange indeed that they denied they would do this. It seems they’ve had a change of heart for some reason - if they have still been paying for font licensing over the last 2 years then that isn’t great having previously stated that they wouldn’t need too! Or, maybe they just feel the new blocks will sit better with whatever the new channel branding looks like?

[Roger Darthwell]

It looks like this is the official stance on the new BBC logo. Definitely created in-house to save costs in the long term with a font they own. And 'tidy up' is how they're justifying the design of the updated blocks which also suggests a phased update starting from this Autumn.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/bbc-defends-lo...11812.html

But only 2 years ago when BBC News was reithed, the BBC denied that the same thing would happen to the logo, because it's trademarked and the letters BBC inside of the logo are considered shapes instead of text, so the so called ''font licensing'' does not even apply to the logo itself! As I said before does this mean that the Beeb has kept paying for ''font licensing''for 2 more years after reith was introduced? If this is the case then why wait 2 full years to reithise the logo. This makes no sense!

Absolutely, It’s very strange indeed that they denied they would do this. It seems they’ve had a change of heart for some reason - if they have still been paying for font licensing over the last 2 years then that isn’t great having previously stated that they wouldn’t need too! Or, maybe they just feel the new blocks will sit better with whatever the new channel branding looks like?

This just shows you that this font licensing thing is very fishy indeed, they are having a change of heart for the worse, everybody talks about ''saving money'' but do you have any idea of how much money the BBC will have to spend replacing every single logo with the new one......this is bonkers, and it just shows you that they are not truthful about all of this!

[JetixFann450]

Well it certainly probably explains why the News website still hasn't been Reithed completely.

[brioalex]

But only 2 years ago when BBC News was reithed, the BBC denied that the same thing would happen to the logo, because it's trademarked and the letters BBC inside of the logo are considered shapes instead of text, so the so called ''font licensing'' does not even apply to the logo itself! As I said before does this mean that the Beeb has kept paying for ''font licensing''for 2 more years after reith was introduced? If this is the case then why wait 2 full years to reithise the logo. This makes no sense!

Absolutely, It’s very strange indeed that they denied they would do this. It seems they’ve had a change of heart for some reason - if they have still been paying for font licensing over the last 2 years then that isn’t great having previously stated that they wouldn’t need too! Or, maybe they just feel the new blocks will sit better with whatever the new channel branding looks like?

This just shows you that this font licensing thing is very fishy indeed, they are having a change of heart for the worse, everybody talks about ''saving money'' but do you have any idea of how much money the BBC will have to spend replacing every single logo with the new one......this is bonkers, and it just shows you that they are not truthful about all of this!

It looks like they’re currently defending against anyone that is complaining about the cost of designing the new blocks themselves never mind the physical logo replacements that will need doing eventually. I guess they’ll be looking to spread the cost of that over many years where they’ll phase the new logo onto building signage amongst other things etc…

[Roger Darthwell]

Well it certainly probably explains why the News website still hasn't been Reithed completely.

Well said my friend! I mean for real, the BBC still paying a lot of money for font licensing only because of the logo and the word News in Gill Sans?

[Roger Darthwell]

Absolutely, It’s very strange indeed that they denied they would do this. It seems they’ve had a change of heart for some reason - if they have still been paying for font licensing over the last 2 years then that isn’t great having previously stated that they wouldn’t need too! Or, maybe they just feel the new blocks will sit better with whatever the new channel branding looks like?

This just shows you that this font licensing thing is very fishy indeed, they are having a change of heart for the worse, everybody talks about ''saving money'' but do you have any idea of how much money the BBC will have to spend replacing every single logo with the new one......this is bonkers, and it just shows you that they are not truthful about all of this!

It looks like they’re currently defending against anyone that is complaining about the cost of designing the new blocks themselves never mind the physical logo replacements that will need doing eventually. I guess they’ll be looking to spread the cost of that over many years where they’ll phase the new logo onto building signage amongst other things etc…

It's just so disheartening though, a very well made, iconic and timeless logo replaced with that.....really makes you sad

[reworP wehttaM]

Looks like the word is out

Honestly, I would've gone for slightly larger letters to eat up all that space

[brioalex]

This just shows you that this font licensing thing is very fishy indeed, they are having a change of heart for the worse, everybody talks about ''saving money'' but do you have any idea of how much money the BBC will have to spend replacing every single logo with the new one......this is bonkers, and it just shows you that they are not truthful about all of this!

It looks like they’re currently defending against anyone that is complaining about the cost of designing the new blocks themselves never mind the physical logo replacements that will need doing eventually. I guess they’ll be looking to spread the cost of that over many years where they’ll phase the new logo onto building signage amongst other things etc…

It's just so disheartening though, a very well made, iconic and timeless logo replaced with that.....really makes you sad

Totally agree, it's crazy to think a logo that is over 20 years old and one that is iconically BBC will be phased out from the Autumn. It's definitely a bold move to make! Maybe they're hoping it'll make them relevant again. (not sure how they think a new logo will do that for them though!)

[Brekkie]

Back from my ticking off for speaking my mind on the GB News editorial content.

I had hoped this BBC Logo was an aberration. Of course we are not seeing it in its fully formed usage across multiple channels and genre strands, so I don't discount the fact they may be able to make it work well and feel fresh.

There has to have been thought put into how this logo would work on mobile devices and websites. The spacing between the blocks being increased is likely to be an affordance for small sizes. But it does feel less polished than the current 1997 logo, and as I did back on TV Forum - using the new font, and increasing spacing, need not result in as awkward a looking logo.

Then there will be time. I am sure many balked at the 1997 logo replacing the coloured slanted 1991 logo. Once implemented and as remnants of the old logo are replaced, the familiarity that we have with the logo will colour our views.

As for the cost, I will leave that argument to the Right Wing lobby and their odious Newspaper outlets to bemoan and get all agitated with.

Channel Rebrandings and building signage does require some cost and replacement over time, and I am sure the BBC will not be in a rush to replace every physical version of it in one go.


Current Logo

My version of a Reith Logo

New Logo

Your version is definitely far better - and has the advantage (or perhaps disadvantage to the designer!) that to the untrained eye it looks indistinguishable, so it's not like they need to rush around replacing all instances of the logo straight away

But you hit the nail on the head here - surely that’s the disadvantage of that mock and exactly why they haven’t just done a like for like replacement with Reith? For all the negatives in the new design, by making it obviously different to what’s gone before they’re ensuring the new version will need to be used consistently and making it easier to spot and correct any incorrect uses of the old/incorrect logo.

I agree the mock looks nicer, but it really becomes the definition of a pointless rebrand (and a “waste of money”) if it’s that similar.

Although in reality a nicely proportioned update of the logo would cost not a single penny more than what they supposedly plan. And if they really wanted something noticeably different wouldn't it be better to go for something completely different rather than a clearly poorer version of what they've already got?

[AlfieMulcahy]

Back from my ticking off for speaking my mind on the GB News editorial content.

I had hoped this BBC Logo was an aberration. Of course we are not seeing it in its fully formed usage across multiple channels and genre strands, so I don't discount the fact they may be able to make it work well and feel fresh.

There has to have been thought put into how this logo would work on mobile devices and websites. The spacing between the blocks being increased is likely to be an affordance for small sizes. But it does feel less polished than the current 1997 logo, and as I did back on TV Forum - using the new font, and increasing spacing, need not result in as awkward a looking logo.

Then there will be time. I am sure many balked at the 1997 logo replacing the coloured slanted 1991 logo. Once implemented and as remnants of the old logo are replaced, the familiarity that we have with the logo will colour our views.

As for the cost, I will leave that argument to the Right Wing lobby and their odious Newspaper outlets to bemoan and get all agitated with.

Channel Rebrandings and building signage does require some cost and replacement over time, and I am sure the BBC will not be in a rush to replace every physical version of it in one go.


Current Logo

My version of a Reith Logo

New Logo

Your version is definitely far better - and has the advantage (or perhaps disadvantage to the designer!) that to the untrained eye it looks indistinguishable, so it's not like they need to rush around replacing all instances of the logo straight away

I think that's the key here. Replace the logos (with the possibly exception of the linear channels) as and when the packages need updating.

[DTV]

The thing is, no matter how great the justification is, nothing takes away from the fact that it is fundamentally a crap logo. A poor logo on its own terms, made poorer when compared to the existing, vastly superior logo. I still struggle to believe that an adult, experienced graphic designer made that, looked at it and thought - 'that looks good'.

While, as many forumers have demonstrated, better proportioned Reith blocks are available, they only look better by being more like the existing logo and still don't manage to better MLN's efforts. This is partly because creating a good Reith logo is an impossible task. I've said many times that Reith is a perfectly serviceable body font, but lacks the gravitas, distinctiveness or oomph that a logo font requires. Everytime I see a Reith logo it just reinforces that view. It just lacks the discipline and character of Gill, Futura, Frugiter etc.

FWIW, I always thought that New Johnston Medium would look quite nice in the blocks. Don't have it on me right now, but, IMO, Kono's B is slightly better proportioned than Gill's.

[ConorM98]

Hope BBC News finally gets a new look, new colour and new theme music hopefully.
But that's only in everyone's wildest dreams.

[TVenthusiasm]

Hope BBC News finally gets a new look, new colour and new theme music hopefully.
But that's only in everyone's wildest dreams.

Theme-wise, I don't think it will be replaced anytime soon. But the current graphics have been used since 2007 (I think) so most likely will be refreshed.

[Flux]

Although in reality a nicely proportioned update of the logo would cost not a single penny more than what they supposedly plan. And if they really wanted something noticeably different wouldn't it be better to go for something completely different rather than a clearly poorer version of what they've already got?

Oh I agree completely, and in fact said just as much earlier in the thread - it would have been easier to just replace the font, but they’ve obviously decided not to and I’m just trying to guess how and why they justified that change. I assume having a clear rebrand/visual difference must have been key in the decision else they wouldn’t be changing it as much, but part of me suspects they chickened out of anything actually exciting and new - so what we’re getting is a middle ground, familiar but tweaked, rather dull end product. Reminiscent of every time Corrie has updated the Rovers’ wallpaper over the last 20 years!!

[brioalex]

The thing is, no matter how great the justification is, nothing takes away from the fact that it is fundamentally a crap logo. A poor logo on its own terms, made poorer when compared to the existing, vastly superior logo. I still struggle to believe that an adult, experienced graphic designer made that, looked at it and thought - 'that looks good'.

While, as many forumers have demonstrated, better proportioned Reith blocks are available, they only look better by being more like the existing logo and still don't manage to better MLN's efforts. This is partly because creating a good Reith logo is an impossible task. I've said many times that Reith is a perfectly serviceable body font, but lacks the gravitas, distinctiveness or oomph that a logo font requires. Everytime I see a Reith logo it just reinforces that view. It just lacks the discipline and character of Gill, Futura, Frugiter etc.

FWIW, I always thought that New Johnston Medium would look quite nice in the blocks. Don't have it on me right now, but, IMO, Kono's B is slightly better proportioned than Gill's.

I’m not a big fan of Reith either. It’s a little bit like Helvetica, it has very little character and I suppose that’s what they were going for… something that’s unobtrusive. They haven’t got much choice but to use it now since they created it and own the rights to it.