First Impressions on Brandmarks - a child's perspective
This YouTube video was shared around the office today. This made me think a little about my own childhood and what brands I've felt a strong connection with over the years. It's interesting, though, the focus on the purely visual aspect of these marks rather than what each brand stands for. It also begs the question; how much or how little does the mark have to actually represent the brand or brand offering? How obvious must it be? Does it really matter? In the case of Apple it's not so much about an apple itself but the playfulness – the choice of a fruit to represent a technology company. Some brands understand semiotics better than others. It can be said that these symbols are powerful enough on their own after many years of building brand awareness. But at what stage should a brand drop the name and simply rely on a symbol (if they have one) to do the talking? The Starbucks brand is a recent example of this change. Here their iconic graphic has enough equity without the need for the name to be included identity.