Nicky Dieter, Flickr

For decades, political campaign advertising had more in common with Menards than Milton Glaser: campaign graphic designers — whose job was to sell candidates often through an expected visual language of flag-toned stars and/or bars — took the back seat, while the well-funded media buyers got the front. Then came Barack Obama. His campaign, lead by design director Scott Thomas, enlisted designer Sol Sender to both create a memorable, appealing identity and advance the lessons of Howard Dean’s web-savvy “netroots” surge of 2004.

We all know what happened next. Obama’s “O” logo became ubiquitous, embraced and modified by supporters so it appeared everywhere: carved into Halloween pumpkins, spray-painted on city concrete, plastered on cars, t-shirts and mugs, reprinted on one of American history’s most recognized political posters, and interpreted by DIYers on murals, baked goods, light-up bike spokes and beyond.

"Change" by Patrick T. Power

Next Tuesday, May 12, Thomas and Sender will be speaking at Minneapolis’ Walker Art Center on the development of the Obama campaign in a panel called, “Designing Obama” — and Minnesota Independent editor Paul Schmelzer will be moderating the discussion. He’ll begin the evening by putting the campaign into historical context (how it differs from more traditional patriotic-themed campaigns by candidates like Bush, Gore and Clinton and from Obama’s 2008 challenger, Republican John McCain, whose design motif is reminiscent of a luxury car ad) and geographical context (how it played in the land of Jesse “the Body” ads and Paul Wellstone’s still omipresent green bumperstickers), before highlighting examples of creative re-use of the “O” logo.

In preparation, what would you like to ask Sender and Thomas? Got a critique or kudos for the campaign? Leave your thoughts in comments.

Tickets can be purchased here, or watch the event’s webcast live at the Walker Channel.

Earlier: Design with a big O: On developing Obama’s campaign identity

While Barack Obama apparently did many things right on his campaign, possibly the most visible mark of success was his ubiquitous graphic design identity. Now that the dust of Election 2008 is settling, Sol Sender, who along with Andy Keene and Amanda Gentry, designed the identity, is discussing how the logo came to be. Fitting Obama’s theme of “change,” the campaign didn’t go with seasoned political marketers but with MODE, a Chicago motion-graphics firm that had never done a political identity before. “The design expression was so constrained and so bland for so many years in politics,” Sender says. “I think we had a fresh approach because we’d never worked on a campaign before” — and, of course, the power of the logo had a lot to do with “the power of the candidate’s message.”

Surveying competitors in the ’08 race and noting that “there were no real logos to speak of,” he and his team created, over two weeks, seven or eight options for the campaign.

Watch the videos, created by VSA Partners, where Sender now works as a strategist, then take a look at some of logo options Obama’s campaign had to choose from, after the jump.

Sender discusses the design process…

…and then how the identity went viral:

Before design began, the team looked at the kind of vocabulary that has dominated presidential campaigns:

A few of the eight design concepts presented to the Obama campaign:

Here’s the runner-up, ultimately beaten out by the red, white and blue Obama “O” logo we’ve all seen a million times:

And one of the many viral permutations — which ranged from Obama cookies to DIY t-shirts — of the identity:

Related:
Coleman’s ‘Victory’ mimics Obama’s ‘Change’

Designs for signs, Web sites show presidential candidates’ strengths, weaknesses

(Hat-tip Tom Elko.)

With another convention in the wings, I contacted the artists to see if they had any updates to their self-published book, GOP 100: Deconstructing Dumbo. While they said the book is still fresh four years later and doesn’t necessarily need updating, they had one: a retitled piece showing an elephant in prison stripes (reminiscent of this year’s convention logo). It’s now called “Larry Craig.” But Sockwell, who has created illustrations for clients from the New York Times and Apple to Newsweek and the U.S. Holocaust Museum, agreed to share some illustrations from the book here, along with each work’s title. And next week, he’ll give MnIndy an exclusive illustration that traces the evolution of the Democratic donkey and Republican elephant logos.

Why is the GOP elephant Democratic blue? Are those prison stripes on its back? And — given the convention’s proximity to Sen. Larry Craig’s infamous bathroom stall — why the wide stance?

Both parties unveiled convention-related logos this week. The Republicans’ “triumphant elephant” faces off against Democratic Committee’s seemingly Winter Olympics-themed mark, which depicts the Rocky Mountain setting for the Denver conclave while highlighting “the importance of the West to the future of the Democratic Party.” (This is the committee logo; no official DNC logo has been released yet.) Relying on experts to determine if the parties succeeded in their aesthetic or communications goals with the designs, I asked Twin Cities design luminaries to weigh in. As their responses roll in, I’ll post them.“Wait, wait, wait, is this even a logo?” So asks Aesthetic Apparatus‘ Dan Ibarra of the DNCC logo. “There’s so much crammed in here, it’s got no focus and is filled with such astoundingly awkward space and line-intersections. My favorite part is the very top arc of the last ‘C’ ALMOST touching that white bar… but not. It is wholly appropriate that COMMITTEE be highlighted on the bottom as this logo was definitely designed by one.”

He adds: “I thought Enron’s first logo was much better.”

Andrew Blauvelt, design director/curator at the Walker Art Center thinks the mountain range is appropriate for the Democrats’ Denver locale and “Western state ambitions,” but wonders “if the number of stars alludes to the current crop of candidates,” he adds. “Is Hillary brightest and Kucinich in a galaxy far, far away?”

For the Republicans’ logo, Blauvelt notes the prominent “TM” to the upper right of the mark:  “Why trademark something that will never be stolen?”

“While the Democrats have a constellation of stars, the Republicans offer us only one: a twinkle in the eye of the GOP’s elephant. For the party always enforcing being on-message and towing the line, however, this pachyderm seems angry to me, up on hind legs as if he’s taken too much abuse from his trainer.”

Ibarra laments, “as bad as this logo is, it’s better than the DNCC’s.”

“At least this one has got some focus to it. Nice under-thought type choice though, boy,” he says. “But Andrew is right: What the hell is the elephant doing rearing up? Maybe elephant’s rear in nature all the time — I don’t know — but in my experience they rear either in anger (I love the violent, pro-war undertone I get with that) or because they’re some trained circus elephant about to balance on a nice bright red ball (I love the ‘we’ll happily be manipulated to suit your needs!’ undertone on that interpretation.) The latter is probably the correct intent as the thing is wearing a nice little stripy blanket.”

Ibarra’s last comment focuses on the lone star on the pachyderm’s face.

“I don’t know elephant physiology but is that star really where an elephant’s eye is? It kind of looks like its cheek.”
]]> http://minnesotaindependent.com/2530/convene-scene-designers-look-at-political-logos/feed 6