maggie+media

The Resolution of Gap Logo-Gate

Perfectly summed up by TechCrunch:

What Did It Take To Get The Gap To Reverse Its Logo Redesign?… Only a mocking fake Twitter account, a fake Gap logo generator called Craplogo, a Twitter and Facebook avatar campaign, a failed logo crowd sourcing project, unflattering comparisons to MySpace which also launched a new logo, the unearthing of a Gap branding lawsuit, an Adweek article which posited that the company had designed an intentionally bad logo on purpose and $247 million dollars in stock loss (the logo design unfortunately coincided with a disappointing sales report, see below). Whew!

From their President of Brand, Marka Hansen.

“We’ve learned a lot in this process. And we are clear that we did not go about this in the right way. We recognize that we missed the opportunity to engage with the online community. This wasn’t the right project at the right time for crowd sourcing.”

While few people were actually fans of the new logo, it’s kind of heart breaking to see the company capitulate to users in this way. If I was The Gap I would have countered the backlash by changing my logo to this.

Or, at the very least, I WOULD HAVE NOT WRITTEN MY “WE’RE REVERTING BACK” PRESS RELEASE HEADLINE IN ALL CAPS.

Tarnishing a Brand

As many of you already know, I’m a huge fan of college basketball. I’m also a big fan of Target. It’s not often I can talk about these two interests as they relate to my marketing work, but this week the gods have smiled on me (not so much on the folks below) so let’s talk about it.

First:

Louisville Cardinals men’s basketball coach Rick Pitino has won his case against Karen Sypher, who was convicted of extorting money from Pitino, lying to the FBI, and retaliating against Pitino. But this is a Pyrrhic victory, to say the least. 

The trial was a result of accusations Sypher made earlier that Pitino had raped her and fathered a child, which she later aborted. Pitino—a married man—denied the charge of rape but was forced, on the stand, to recount the graphic details of their apparently consensual encounter. You can read the details here, but suffice it to say they are humiliating, and that there will be many student-section taunts suggesting Pitino call a 15-second timeout next season.

Beyond the embarrassment, though, is a real blow to Pitino’s image—and by extension, the program and the school. Division I college basketball is big business, and arguably the most important part of that business is recruiting. Pitino and his staff spend countless hours and dollars courting the best talent, attempting to sell the benefits of their program and, in reality, themselves. And while many players seek out the school that will best catapault them to the NBA after a season (which itself has a lot to do with the coach’s image—exhibit A: John Calipari), just as many others and their parents, evaluate offers based more on the quality of program/people their son will be associated with. Pitino’s job just got a lot harder on that front: it can’t be easy for him to convince young men and their families that his program is the right place for them to grow into successful men.

How much would it have been worth to his reputation, and his brand, to have settled out of court and avoided this whole thing? We’ll find out by watching as the next recruiting classes are solidified and how the team performs. Pitino’s coming off a mediocre year already, and patience is not a virtue possessed by most fan bases.

Next:

News recently broke that Target donated $150,000 to MN Forward, a Republican group who supports gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer, an outspoken opponent of gay rights. Target’s CEO has apologized to employees, but calls for company boycotts have continued.

Through it all, as AdaptiveMarketer has pointed out, Target’s social media presence has remained conspicuously silent, in particular letting their Facebook page devolve into an ugly, angry online space. And they’ve certainly not made any effort to suggest they’ll donate to candidates who are gay rights supporters.

Target sells itself as a fairer, hipper alternative to other big-box stores, and their customers are younger and more democratic than their competitors’. This is an issue that can hurt them badly. And yet their response to it has been poor on almost every front.

Both Pitino and Target brands have been tarnished, but what’s striking is that they’ve been damaged more than they needed to be. These are great reminders that brand management is also crisis management—knowing your audience and responding appropriately, even if it hurts to do so, is crucial. Because after all, Pitino may have been proven right and Target may have acted perfectly legally, but who cares?