BBC (Miscellaneous): 2021 Rebrand

[chaose]

Chameleon was meant to unify the identities so it makes little sense that they have not connected it all together, but in effect recreated the old radio logos with a new font. Eg sport should have yellow bbc blocks to tie it all together, but I think it’s been a missed opportunity

I see how the random logo placement in the Annual Report can obfuscate the concept behind it all.

But if you re-arrange the logos in a meaningful way it becomes quite clear. I've done it here:



There is a clear distinction between TV brands, radio brands and service brands (BBC Parliament is seen as an extension of the News brand, so it follows that logic).

Makes sense to me, to be honest. Unifying the identities doesn't automatically mean to make them all the exact same. How boring would that be? And as long as there's a discernible concept behind the variations I can't see anything wrong with it.

[TVGuy]

Chameleon was meant to unify the identities so it makes little sense that they have not connected it all together, but in effect recreated the old radio logos with a new font. Eg sport should have yellow bbc blocks to tie it all together, but I think it’s been a missed opportunity

I see how the random logo placement in the Annual Report can obfuscate the concept behind it all.

But if you re-arrange the logos in a meaningful way it becomes quite clear. I've done it here:



There is a clear distinction between TV brands, radio brands and service brands (BBC Parliament is seen as an extension of the News brand, so it follows that logic).

Makes sense to me, to be honest. Unifying the identities doesn't automatically mean to make them all the exact same. How boring would that be? And as long as there's a discernible concept behind the variations I can't see anything wrong with it.

Now I've seen these rearranged, It all makes sense now. All channels, except NEWS, PARLIAMENT, CBBC and CBEEBIES have the BBC logo in colour, while the radio stations and services all have white BBC blocks, plus the channels I mentioned that are coloured in this quote.

[AxiosBrit67]

Chameleon was meant to unify the identities so it makes little sense that they have not connected it all together, but in effect recreated the old radio logos with a new font. Eg sport should have yellow bbc blocks to tie it all together, but I think it’s been a missed opportunity

I see how the random logo placement in the Annual Report can obfuscate the concept behind it all.

But if you re-arrange the logos in a meaningful way it becomes quite clear. I've done it here:



There is a clear distinction between TV brands, radio brands and service brands (BBC Parliament is seen as an extension of the News brand, so it follows that logic).

Makes sense to me, to be honest. Unifying the identities doesn't automatically mean to make them all the exact same. How boring would that be? And as long as there's a discernible concept behind the variations I can't see anything wrong with it.

Yes if we think about the implementation of Chameleon branding on domestic service (BBC Bitesize seen missing here despite mentioned on earlier page, as well as Radio 3, 1Xtra, 4 Extra, 5 Sport Extra).

Meanwhile, international services tended to be mixed regarding the Chameleon branding implementation. While BBC Select, BBC Kids, BBC World News, World Service Radio, and (soon-to-be) BBC First follow the chameleon branding very closely, BBC America retained the existing logo, albelt with new blocks. Others like BritBox (internationally joint venture with ITV) unfortunately still use the old BBC logo.

[GraemeT]

Chameleon was meant to unify the identities so it makes little sense that they have not connected it all together, but in effect recreated the old radio logos with a new font. Eg sport should have yellow bbc blocks to tie it all together, but I think it’s been a missed opportunity

I see how the random logo placement in the Annual Report can obfuscate the concept behind it all.

But if you re-arrange the logos in a meaningful way it becomes quite clear. I've done it here:



There is a clear distinction between TV brands, radio brands and service brands (BBC Parliament is seen as an extension of the News brand, so it follows that logic).

Makes sense to me, to be honest. Unifying the identities doesn't automatically mean to make them all the exact same. How boring would that be? And as long as there's a discernible concept behind the variations I can't see anything wrong with it.

Other than the lack of vibrancy from this image, I think it shows a great deal of clarity and consistency in the scheme

[natashajacobs]

Have to disagree, I think it shows a scheme which is basically just a change of typeface for the relevant brands, but all entitled to our opinions. I really like the icons as it’s so fresh but any chance to use the blocks as a chameleon here has been missed for me.

[GraemeT]

Is ‘just a change of typeface’ bad?

[VMPhil]

“Unifying the identities doesn't automatically mean to make them all the exact same. How boring would that be?”

This kind of thinking is what got them in their logo mess in the first place - it’s the surrounding branding that conveys the personality not the logo (hence why the new radio logos are much simpler than previous)

[natashajacobs]

Is ‘just a change of typeface’ bad?

I think it’s quite lazy but at least it does have some recognition factor with the radio circles, I’ll give them that. And it fits with the Sounds ‘cogwheel’. But I also think they had the opportunity here to really go for it here and do something different, in line with the new icons and the chameleon idea, which was pure genius. To create a really strong and unified bbc identity. I’m not quite sure they’ve achieved it.

[NancerOnTheLIVEForum]

Simply because Radio has a altogether distinguishing, however conceptually connected, design from the television channels within the entire design of the corporation.

That doesn’t answer my Q though. Chameleon was meant to unify the identities so it makes little sense that they have not connected it all together, but in effect recreated the old radio logos with a new font. Eg sport should have yellow bbc blocks to tie it all together, but I think it’s been a missed opportunity

They have connected them, they're just ever so slightly different to seperate them from each other. The channels have the blocks in full colour and smaller than the channel name, the services have the blocks in white with coloured names in the same size, and the radio station have the BBC Radio logo next to a circle with the station number in it

[chaose]

“Unifying the identities doesn't automatically mean to make them all the exact same. How boring would that be?”

This kind of thinking is what got them in their logo mess in the first place - it’s the surrounding branding that conveys the personality not the logo (hence why the new radio logos are much simpler than previous)

I agree. The logos need to be consistent and simple, I was not arguing against that. But I think different TYPES of logos should be allowed to have small distinguishing features such as coloured blocks for TV brands, discs for radio brands and white blocks for services.

[Internationalman]

“Unifying the identities doesn't automatically mean to make them all the exact same. How boring would that be?”

This kind of thinking is what got them in their logo mess in the first place - it’s the surrounding branding that conveys the personality not the logo (hence why the new radio logos are much simpler than previous)

I agree. The logos need to be consistent and simple, I was not arguing against that. But I think different TYPES of logos should be allowed to have small distinguishing features such as coloured blocks for TV brands, discs for radio brands and white blocks for services.

The thing about "how the surrounding branding convey the personality of the logo and not the logo itself" is not this rebranding. That is the ML-N rebranding in 1997. This, however, is much different from 1997. Though they might look slightly different, there is genuinely a unifying concept behind the current rebrand. And that is a feeling of connection. It is symbolized by the BBC logo always on top of its services, and, even though this may sound a little off-road, the GRADIENTS! Since gradients mesh together (and can be admittedly quite beautiful), the BBC chose it to put forward the idea of connection and unity to the brand styles. I feel consistency isn't what we are going for, but a sort of hybrid between pre-1997 and 1997 itself in terms of the design concept.

[VMPhil]

The thing about "how the surrounding branding convey the personality of the logo and not the logo itself" is not this rebranding. That is the ML-N rebranding in 1997.

I'm fully aware of this, but most corporate branding these days is unified as much as possible - the BBC were very much the exception to this especially if you look at the other broadcasters around. I don't think so far what they've done is perfect but it's a step in the right direction, and I fully appreciate they are unlikely to go full 1997 uniform.

[AxiosBrit67]

I'm fully aware of this, but most corporate branding these days is unified as much as possible - the BBC were very much the exception to this especially if you look at the other broadcasters around. I don't think so far what they've done is perfect but it's a step in the right direction, and I fully appreciate they are unlikely to go full 1997 uniform.

That's partly because CBBC and CBeebies need to maintain their recognized branding. I believe newly-renamed CBBC (as a block, not a channel) try to adopt corporate BBC branding using Gill Sans designed by MLN, the result was horrible for children and teen audiences despite it were the first step towards a single BBC branding for all services at the time.

The new BBC TV branding (sans CBBC and CBeebies) and local radio branding looks unified when it comes to print (monochrome) version of the logo, also for BBC national radio stations, which use circle combined with a number for respective radio station logos.

[BBCMeridian]

I'm fully aware of this, but most corporate branding these days is unified as much as possible - the BBC were very much the exception to this especially if you look at the other broadcasters around. I don't think so far what they've done is perfect but it's a step in the right direction, and I fully appreciate they are unlikely to go full 1997 uniform.

That's partly because CBBC and CBeebies need to maintain their recognized branding. I believe newly-renamed CBBC (as a block, not a channel) try to adopt corporate BBC branding using Gill Sans designed by MLN, the result was horrible for children and teen audiences despite it were the first step towards a single BBC branding for all services at the time.

The new BBC TV branding (sans CBBC and CBeebies) and local radio branding looks unified when it comes to print (monochrome) version of the logo, also for BBC national radio stations, which use circle combined with a number for respective radio station logos.

Oh nonsense, I loved the corporate branding during the yellow and black era, infact it was the best era for CBBC in branding especially as the C was added in front of BBC One and BBC Two logos.

[GraemeT]

Oh jeez.

Add a balloon to the yellow and black era and I think this forum would fall over ??