On brand indentities that are flexible (vs. those that are static). Examples: Google's logo, Target's bullseye, and Saks' jumbly identity. "As advertising agencies lose their grip on the communications channels, the logos are starting to come out of the corner. Once pushed as far over to the bottom right as possible, they're becoming central to communication, no longer content to just be the the full-stop at the end of a piece of branded communication." (via quipsologies)
This news isn't new, but it's still irritating. Companies that do photo prints (Target, in this case) refuse to print certain photographs because they look too professional. Digital cameras are so good and cheap these days that everyone's taking professional-looking photos...Flickr is full of pro-looking stuff shot by complete amateurs. This stupid policy needs to change or these places aren't going to have any business left.
This blog cites a Target store advertising on Google Maps (by painting their logo on the roof), but it's more likely that the bullseye is there for the benefit of airline passengers landing at nearby O'Hare (as this slightly wider view shows). (via bb)
The August 22nd issue of the New Yorker (which comes out on, duh, August 15th) will contain ads from only one advertiser, Target.
