Much was written on the aesthetics of Wolff Olins’ creation of the London Olympics 2012 brand when it was launched in 2007. The controversy no longer rages but having given it over two years worth of the ‘over night’ test, I’m still not a convert.

There’s probably little that I can contribute to the debate other than the fact that Wolff Olins have used a similar aperture technique of placing different images and colours behind the logo for other clients including NYC and Visit London. Old ideas for a new audience, that’s acceptable of course.

www.everyjoe.com/articles/2012-london-olympics-logo-controversy-the-2007-branding-year-in-review/

But, and it’s a big but, is there even a need for an Olympics ‘sub-brand’ for each host country? The Olympic movement has one of the strongest, globally identified brands there is. And it’s reinforced every two years to hundreds of millions of people across the world. Ask yourself these questions. Do you recall the logo for the Moscow, LA or even Rome games? Or the Winter Olympics 2006 in Torino? The answer is probably no.

But you could draw the Olympic symbol from memory couldn’t you? And you probably know that the interlocking circles represent the five continents. The personality of the games, but not the brand, comes through the history, culture and individuality of the host city, enhanced by the sporting heroes of the day – Bolt, Redgrave-Pinsent, Spitz and Owens spring to mind. And that’s an important distinction; the Olympic brand is independent of location. By creating a sub-brand - the offspring challenges the parent and weakens it.

Perhaps a more courageous Wolff Olins might have recommended as the logo for the Olympics 2012 something like this. The Olympic symbol with London 2012 in Helvetica placed underneath. If that was the case we’d probably now be debating whether London 2012 should be in black, blue, green, yellow or red?

I was lucky enough to be invited to attend the first major conference dedicated to how the Aerospace and Defence industry can help combat climate change. The Energy and Environmental Defence and Security Conference (E2DS’09) held at the RSA, London on November 5th to 6th gave a fascinating insight. Sponsors included Rolls Royce, EADS, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Saab, Northrop Grumman, ITT, Finmeccanica, ADS, ASD and others.

The extent of the very real climate change threat that we face was hammered home by keynote speaker Dr Berrien Moore, co-recipient of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.

This illuminating and thought provoking conference was a result of the vision of Nick Cook, journalist and MD of Dynamixx, the organisers of the event. As Nick said, “Our mission is to create a dynamic forum for the Aerospace and Defence community and so foster dialogue, debate and analysis of the many opportunities that await it in the energy and environmental arenas.”

Here at Beechwood, we’ve developed creative marcoms campaigns for our technology clients on The Greening of the Data Centre, Energy Efficiency, IT for the Environment and more. So it’s reassuring to think that, maybe one day, the Aerospace, Defence, IT and Technology sectors will all combine together to take up the challenge of climate change through collaboration and innovation.

http://dynamixx-e2d.com

With congratulations to Roz Littlewood and Graham Hart for managing such a successful event.