#johnst

John St. is one of my favorite agencies. In 1996 when I graduated from Durham College’s Advertising program, my goal at the time was to be like Bill Bernbach (or Donald Draper) and become and Ad Man - coming up with amazing ideas for massive companies and seeing my work in TV commercials, print ads, activations and even end caps in stores. Life in the ad industry wasn’t quite as glamorous for me though, and I spent months buying radio ad space for various agency clients. It bored me to death and the commute/daily grind wore me down, so I moved onto other things - and while in a roundabout way I’m still in advertising (social media), I never ended up drinking Martinis for lunch with other ad guys at John St., McCann or JWT like I dreamed of all those years ago.

One of my classmates, however, kept at it and worked her way up through various agencies, and she brought to my attention today that the new logo for Ontario 150 is from John St. So why do I like these guys? Well, if you’ve seen their “Kids Read Mean Tweets” campaign for The Canadian Safe School Network, you’ll see why their work stands out to me. 

According to CTV, this logo was approved last April, but the cost came out recently;  and has since been reported rather unbiasedly by media channels. Yes, the same media who frequently also take shots are our Liberal Government. They’re saying that this logo cost us taxpayers $30,000.

An unpopular politician spending taxpayer money on something creative? It’s no surprise the logo is getting roasted.

Not a “Great” Logo

Is it a great logo? In my opinion — not overly, but I’ll say that with the caveat that truly great logos are few and far between. This one is just fine. It’s one of those logos you’d pass on the street, see and not think twice about. It’s inoffensive, simple, playful, and yes, youthful. It’s far better than the blobs used for the 2015 Pan-Am Games and light years better than the London 2012 logo, which while scary, I’ll admit, grew on me as the games wore on, and for all intents and purposes was a success from a merchandising perspective 5 years ago — even if it cost $625,000 for all the work on it.

Based on social media though, you’d think the Ontario 150 logo was designed by Donald Trump or maybe had a secret swastika or Crying Jordan  embedded in it. Twitter, radio and newspapers are going off about it. “It’s not clear, it’s not clean — it’s not balanced.”  That’s Richard Powers, the national academic director at the Rotman School of Management talking to the Toronto Star. I guess the  Toronto School of Art was unavailable for comment? I think Richard is undoubtedly a smart man, but if you look at any Olympic logo, major event logo and even some company logos in the modern era, clean, clear and balanced is decidedly old fashioned and ultimately boring and forgettable. No agency hangs it hat on rehashing simple 1960′s designs for basic logos and if they did they’re out of business. Companies don’t want basic anymore - they want edgy and leading edge. They want something that is memorable and stands out in a sea of sameness. In my opinion, Richard's synopsis was a mail-it-in-critique that I found hard to believe was used in a major newspaper. It’s almost like the Star asked everyone in advertising to slam it, they all declined to out of professional courtesy, so they tried to quote the next best thing - an “academic”.

Criticism is Money-Oriented

Most of us regular people on social media are calling it childish, weird and most disturbing of all “costly”.  Yes, the logo is getting bashed most, not for it’s basic design, but for it’s reported price tag — a mere $30,000. In other words, John St. was paid $30,000 for the initial design, 42 separate digital pieces, five separate, fully animated logos, a complete branding guide, the trademarking costs, and the agency hours to produce it all. That’s a far cry from what the media, who is touting the logo itself as costing $30,000, is reporting. Of course, if the media reported all the details or even the truth, they’d never have a story to begin with. Overall, the government is spending $100 million on the province’s 150th celebrations and infrastructure projects — so 0.03% of that is spent on this logo and everyone is losing their minds. Is it taking away Canadian jobs? Not at all, John St. is a Canadian agency based in Montreal and Toronto. So while it wasn’t outsourced to an American, British or worse, a Chinese design firm, it also It wasn’t doodled by some unpopular politicians kid either. 

Nope, even though the Government is supporting Ontario and Canadian workers here, like the John St. staff above, most Ontarians are up in arms about the the cost - one that works out to of a mere $0.002 for each of the 14 million of them. So while they waste hundreds a year on water for their lawns, overpay for gas for thirsty SUVs made in Mexico or the United States, and spend billions on Chinese-made goods; many want their $0.002 back because Kathleen Wynne gave it to Canadians to make a logo for other Canadians. 

That’s what we care about these days: Media-induced hysteria over $0.002.

Bad Logo - Or Change-Resistant Public?

We all know that the public is generally fickle and often conservative. In other words they resist change and resist “weird”. Even the popular new Raptors logo was panned my some when it first launched - or at least it turned off those at the @torontostar. Who, now that I think about it, seem to have a thing for hating on new logos.

I feel bad for the people who worked on this at John St. and those at Queen’s Park.  This logo was clearly aimed at Ontario’s youth and I would bet dollars to donuts that it scored well in the 17-20 demographic - which is likely why it was picked. 

Stacking Public Perception Against the Logo

In the CTV street interviews, we saw mostly middle-aged men and women “shocked” at the cost and baffled at the logo itself. This is the same demographic who mostly doesn’t understand how to build a Spotify playlist or figure out what Snapchat is used for. Nothing wrong with that, but it’s like asking your grandmother review an Echo Dot after have her try to order a pizza with it. She’s going to hate it — but that doesn’t make the Echo Dot any less of an outstanding or innovative product.

I’ve heard some alternative ideas floating around like having school kids design it, or having an open entry for everyone. And they sound good in theory - “hey why not let Jane Average submit her idea and donate the $30,000 to a charity!”  And of course lots of would-be designers are bringing forth their own designs they claim to have whipped up in 5 minutes. It’s too bad that most of them look like it too. 

Why not a UGC Logo?

In my experience user generated content (UGC) for logos, packaging and marketing material is hit and miss  - it sounds like a great way to get cheap labor and ideas, but practical application is always underwhelming, and unless there is significant motivation to build something really good (like say a $30,000 prize?), the entries usually are far below what a trained student or professional would create. Also, the attention span of people for these contests is fleeting, meaning ads and promotional materials would need to be created to keep awareness high. In the end the government would have likely ended up spending far more than $30,000 just to advertise the fact that they’re having a contest to design a logo in the first place. I’m not even touching on the legal aspects, intellectual property searches on entries, and unbiased judging considerations - or their costs. It’s also worthy to note that it’s how embarrassments like the hot-at-the-time “Raptors” team name came about in the 1990′s (runners up were “Bobcats” and get this, “Dragons”). For every great user-created idea like Skydome, there’s a “Boaty McBoatface”.

No, sometimes these things are best left to professionals. In this case professionals who created a universally-acclaimed anti-cyberbullying campaign, but are now the subject of the same online bullying their campaign spoke out against. The irony is rich.

Happy Anniversary Ontario.