Logo for war

[seren1411]

I was incredibly disturbed by the fact that during the recent Gulf conflict the BBC employed a specially designed logo for 'War on Iraq', used in all programmes/ news bulletins relating to the conflict. Can people who get more (commercial) TV than the Brits, i.e. ANYONE, tell me if that's normal?

Anyway, since WHEN is it appropriate?

Soft drinks, sportswear, phone companies, restaurants and other large-scale corporate ventures have logos. NOT wars.

I found the appearance of a logo incredibly distasteful - it felt like something that belonged in satire such as 'Wag the Dog' (BTW - hated that movie!).

So what's next...? Corporate sponsorship for the following chapter in the saga? - Something along the lines of 'Gulf War III: Raiders of the Lost Oil Wells'?

[jku]

EXCELLENT point! Isn't obvious by now that support for a war must be manufactured in the same way we get so worked up over basketball shoes. Through extreme imagery, myth, exaggeration, logos, and outright lies.

I mean, how can you sell MURDER, especially when the primary reason is greed for profits?!

Great point Seren - yes, what is next?
"The destruction of this village brought to you by FORD"

BTW - what is the mood in England towards Blair and the WMDs? Bush has totally spun the situation to make Americans think it didn't matter, when that was the SOLE reason for going into Iraq so quickly!

Manchester - land of the SMITHS (Joy Division/New Order/Mondays)! Cool!

[Benwa]

It's so much worse over here in america that we've become used to it. You don't even recognize it unless you make a conscious effort. Logos and graphics rule here. I read the average teenager can identify over 100 logos, yet less than 30 of their local plant life.

Here we don't have a standard logo, but rather each channel competes with their graphics. It's kind of funny actually. We even get slogans as well. "Attack on America" "Showdown with Saddam". I'm waiting for Fox to air "When Brown People Get Blow'd Up". It's a contest about who can get the most visually stunning newscast. But not surprising all the newscast say very little. Like eating a doughnut for breakfast, it's tastes amazing but gives you no benefit.

The logo just proves that our wars are all about business interest. They have stuff we want. But the guy in charge is a real pain in the a$$ to deal with. It's hostile takeover time! It costs alot of money to kill them little brown desert people. They're some hearty sum'bitches. So you want to get a good return on your investment. The dead, both Coalition and Iraqi are just minor damage. A good PR campaign should smooth out that stuff for the public. Make your side always appear to have died in a heroic circumstance, even though a good number die in friendly fire and futile missions. Take some of the facts and fabricate a fantastic story, like the fourth plane on 9-11 being brought down by heroic passengers. Don't mention the eyewitness accounts of a military jet and definetly don't advertise the debris and human remains found miles away from the crash site (suggesting it blew up before it hit the ground). All the dead people are just a nuissance. The goal is always to get american business' to rebuild and to get a return on our war investment. Of course you can't tell the public this because a vast majority of people believe it to be wrong to kill people for profit. So you get a committee together to think of halftruth reasons to justify a war. Keeping a keen eye on the polls and what scares the public most, you fabricate a semi true tale that any average person sees as a "no brainer". It's best to develop several stories, trying them all out. Aiding Terrorist, the dreaded WMD, Cruelty to his people, the infinite good of our way: democracy. You put all these out there, shuffle them around to figure out which one the fickle public relates to most. Boom! You got your support.

If you look at the war effort being run as a corporation that is looking for a buck, it becomes rather amazing. The similarities are striking. Corporation have no soul or conscious. They are amoral. Not immoral, they don't relish in doing evil deeds. They'd prefer to sweep them under the rug, but if need be the have excellent PR people to handle it. Amoral is simply without morals, they simply don't care. No real goals except to eat and grow. The holy grail= keep it in the black. Grow and eat, eat and grow. Are we growing too big? Shut up and eat! Are we eating too much? Shut up and grow! You see there is no difference between our foreign policies and a large corporation. So a good logo is only fitting.

[pisces2473]

Anyone ever read the book "No Logo"?? It's about the influence of logos on culture...forget the author though...it's a woman, I remember that much, lol. It's a very interesting book.

[tipsy88]

Just to be the devils advocate. If you apply some economics to situation you may find that corporations respond to consumer demand, meaning they do whatever the consumers in their market like to do/see/hear/touch/feel/eat etc..

Logos are used fro branding, so that people can identify with the product easier. Consumer apparently like logo, otherwise you wouldn't see them.

In fact the law of demand can probably attribute to a lot of reason why things (both politically and economically) exist the way they are in our mostly free-market capitalistic economy.

Just to let you know, i have no opinion either way on the matter.

[coll214]

I'm always repulsed with the local news channel's putting their own spin on big events in the state. When the Yale bombing occurred, they all had their logos and even corny music to go along with the intro to the story...whatever happened to just telling the news?

Maybe in England it's just starting to reach the ridiculousness (is that a word? lol) with logos that we have. Want to catch Americans attention?? Then get a logo! :twisted:

[pisces2473]

I don't even watch the news that much anymore...partly because it's over by the time I get home (I don't have cable so no CNN for me) and besides, I want to hear what's going on in the world, not crappy filler about so and so turning 100. Who cares? Also, I think a lot of the news stations around here are really tacky.

[jku]

Pisces - isn't it NAOMI KLEIN? Our friend from England might know of that one.

I think TIPSY is missing the point. In terms of logo being used in the FREE MARKET - that's fine. It's a MUST in a consumer driven society.

BUT to apply those same ideas in SELLING a war - it's just WRONG. I think what BENWA said is EXCELLENT and worth a few reads.

Didn't the 4th plane on 9/11 "crashing itself" seem a bit suspicious to anyone who was paying attention on that awful day? It's pretty clear to me the plane was shot down, considering eyewitnesses saw military jets flying low all around them!

It was tough decision for Bush - and he did the right thing to shoot it down - BUT to capitalize on it with LETS ROLL and the Beamer family! This administration has no shame!!

[pisces2473]

Jku--YES! That's it--Naomi Klein!

Wait...what is this about the fourth plane crashing itself/being shot down? I've never heard about this before...

[Benwa]

A good activist groups that deals with logoism and rampant concumerism is adbusters. www.adbusters.org

I visit their site regularly. It's a a fun group. Like most activist groups they aren't for everyone, but they deserve a look. Anyone in graphic design/media/advertising would find it amusing.


It isn't certain the fourth plane was shot down. But there were report on transmisisons that an explosion was heard before it hit. Many eyewitnesses saw military jets flying low. Experimenta-esqu stealth style jets. But the real evidence lies in the debris field. If the plane crashed in one piece, debris would've been localized to a small area. Yet debris was found many miles from the crash site, suggesting a midair explosion. I've heard that it may have been a bomb the terrorist blew up. But this sounds unlikely to me. If you highjack a plane with the intention of pulling off one of the most theatrical terrorist acts of all time, are you just going to blow it up? Unlikely. It may have went off on accident, but these guys know their explosives. Unlikely. With jets flying around, a midair explosion and logic. It is most likely the plane was shot down.

[coll214]

I remember briefly hearing that there may have been fighter jets in the area that the plane went down and then there was nothing about it again...but i guess the media want to put some nice spin to truly horrific event :( . Unfortunately, Benwa, you're theory sounds right to me.

[tipsy88]

jku, dude all i was trying saying is that the same forces that drive logo usage in the markets are somewhat related to the forces that create the media's usage of it and the current political adminstration for the promotion of this war.

In no way did I mention whatsoever did i morally support or oppose its usage.

In another attempts to play devils advocate and generate some GOOD discussion (not emotionally charged), Benwa if growth is such a bad thing, then why do people complain when it's not happening or when it's not happening fast enough?

[coll214]

tipsy- I've come to the realization that people just aren't happy unless they are complaining about something, whether it's the government, their jobs, love lives, economics, etc. Everyone has their own idea for what constitutes good growth or a lack of...in my opinion :) .

[tipsy88]

I've come to the realization that people just aren't happy unless they are complaining about something

Agreed. It is the epitome of life. After all life is boring without some drama :)

[pisces2473]

Tipsy, don't you mean "life is not sweet without the sour"??? :p \

Sorry, couldn't resist!

[tipsy88]

how do you know it wasn't talking about sweet and sour chicken ;)


your move :D

[pisces2473]

Touche. I don't know what they were talking about-- haven't seen the movie. ;)

[seren1411]

Thanks to most of you for your support on this one (esp jku and benwa) - I'm glad I'm not the only one to find attempts to create brand recognition for war problematic.

Cheers for the tip about Klein's 'No Logos' - am reading it now.

I'm currently struggling to contain my glee at Blair's rapidly diminishing approval ratings as it becomes increasingly obvious to everyone that we were lied to re WMDs. He'll probably survive (what was that about cockroaches and nuclear disaster?) but it looks like its going to cost him.

[seren1411]

And oh, how I wish they had meant chicken
:D

[jku]

Well, just to add one thing in regards to HOW incestuous this War in Iraq and markesting was - VICTORIA CLARKE, was the leader of the media campaign from the Pentagon during the war - she came up with the idea of "embedded reporters" and sold myths like the one surrounding Private Jessica Lynch.

Her background? Not in the military - she was straight off of MADISON AVENUE - the advertising mecca of the United States (and the world).

The other woman who BRANDED the "WAR on TERROR" -
Charlotte Beers - a former exec with J.W.Thompson - the same people who brought you "have you driven a FORD lately?" Check this out:
http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/WarOnTerror/Madison.asp

By the way, Victoria Clarke left the Pentagon in mid-June. So add Ari Fleicher, Christie Todd Whitman, and a very important man by the name of RAND BEERS (see below), and what you have is a sinking ship. What these people know, and what Americans will find out very soon, is that the Bush Administration is a sinking ship - and when the final gulps of air are being reached for on this circa 2004 Titanic, the aforementioned won't be aboard - HOPEFULLY the American people won't either.
http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/926798.asp?0cv=cb10
http://www.msnbc.com/news/927874.asp?0sl=-22

And I wish the American public took interest in what comes out of our politicians mouths, instead of whose mouths they insert their members, and understand how CRITICAL this issue of missing Weapons of Mass Destruction is - it seems the BRITS do. We went to Iraq because we were going to get attacked by IRAQ in the IMMEDIATE FUTURE. An imminent threat! WMDs were the WHOLE REASON. If there were no weapons there, and the UN Weapons Inspectors concurred - then why did we go to war?

Because lots of very rich men got a lot richer getting tax funded contracts to carve up the turkey that is Iraq. Well, let the American people know that their meal will sadly be washed down with the blood of young men and women who believe in America and what it TRULY stands for.

As we think of them and their personal sacrifice for our nation under this greedy, manipulative, scandal-ridden Administration - let me wish all a Happy Fourth of July.

[seren1411]

jku,

Don't give us Brits too much credit on this one. While Blair's popularity is in decline, so too is that of Charles Kennedy (Liberal Democrat party leader), who spoke out against involvement in war after no evidence of WMDs had been found by the UN inspectors and has continued to take an anti-war stance.

So if neither leading us into a war founded upon deceit nor holding out against it is acceptable to the British public, we must conclude that in this country apathy is regarded as the best political stance to take.

And that's pathetic.

[tipsy88]

haha, wait why do you wish they meant chicken??

[seren1411]

Aw, c'mon tipsy - profundity in chicken,

now that would be a seriously original tag line!

;)

[tipsy88]

ha, true. but what you describe is a paradox, hollywood and an original thought. :D

[seren1411]

I dunno, there's always David Lynch.

Though does insanity count?

[pisces2473]

What about Michael Moore's movies? They are original thoughts and from Hollywood. Or is different when it's political?

[seren1411]

Yeah, it's different: it's probably rarer.