To What Extent is Semiotics Still a Useful Tool For Advertising Professionals?

Visual Perception in Branding Communication: To What Extent is Semiotics Still a Useful Tool For Advertising Professionals?

This study was completed as part of my First Class Honors degree in BA (Hons) Visual Communication (Graphic Design), in 2008.

Liam ChurchardGraphic Design


1

2 3 4 4 4 5 6 6 7 7 8 9

10 10 12 12 13 13 15 15 16 17 18 19 21 21 22 23 24 37 44

Table of content

1 Introduction 1.1 Background……………………………………...…………………………………... 1.2 Proposal……………………………………..……………………………………...... 1.3 Disciplines………………………………………………………………………….... 1.4 The Logo……………………………………...…………………………………...…. 1.5 Nike/London 2012……………………………………...………………………… 1.6 Demarcations……………………………………...…………………………..……

2 Semiotics 2.1 Linguistics…………………………………...…………………………………….… 2.2 Signifier and signified…………………………………...……………………… 2.3 Codes and Social Semiotics …………………………………...……………… 2.4 Symbol, Icon, Index…………………………………...………………………… 2.5 Denotation, Connotation and Myth…………………………………...…... 2.6 The use of Semiotics for Advertising Professionals…………………...

3 Nike Logo Case Study 3.1 Introduction……………………………...…………………………………….…… 3.2 Design Critique……………………………...……………………………….……. 3.3 Targeting a Wider Audience……………………………...……………..…… 3.4 Competitors……………………………...…………………………………………. 3.5 Other Factors to Success……………………………...…………..…………… 3.6 Summary……………………………...………………………..……………………

4 London 2012 Olympic Logo Case Study

4.1 Introduction……………………………...…………………………………………. 4.2 Design Critique……………………………...…………………………………….. 4.3 Sponsorship Analysis…...………………………..…………………………….. 4.4 Overcoming Criticism…...………………………..…………………………….. 4.5 Previous Olympic Logos…...………………………..……….………………… 4.6 Summary……………………………...………………………..……………………

5 Conclusion

5.1 Critical Analysis Experiment………………………..………………………… 5.2 Implications………………………..……………………………………………..… 5.3 To What Extent is Semiotics Still a Useful Tool for Advertising Professionals?................................................................................... 5.4 Suggestions for Further Work………………………..………………………

6 Media Texts…………………………………………………………………………………… 7 Appendix….……….…………………………………………………………………………… 8 Bibliography………………………………………………………………………………….


2

1 Introduction

1.1 Background

“How exactly, do images persuade? … How do representational images work to

influence the beliefs, attitudes, opinions … of those who view them?” (Hill, Helmers,

2004, 25)

Since starting the course Visual Communication in September 2005 I have had many

questions regarding design, how does the positioning of text direct the viewer across

the page? Why does an object present different vibes if it is photographed at different

angles? How does the choice of media affect the context of an advertisement’s

message? But arguably the most interesting of questions that I have is at the core of

what I’m studying, how exactly, do images persuade? How exactly, do we visually

communicate?

Nearing the end of my course, and having to generate an in-depth dissertation

provides the perfect opportunity for me to research the question that was never

answered.

Asking how exactly, do images persuade, led me to discovering semiotics, Bignell

writes, “semiotics is a way of analysing meanings by looking at the signs which

communicate meaning,” (Bignell, 1997, 1), a discipline this dissertation is largely

based on. It struck me how relevant semiotics is to visual communication, and how

its application in the course could be rewarding to students. What really interested

me is that the semiotic model is over a hundred years old and to place it in the

modern world and in the industry of branding, an ever changing, and fast paced

business where ‘current’ communication can quickly become dated, can that theory

still become credible? In other words, to what extent is semiotics still a useful tool for

advertising professionals?


3

1.2 Proposal

I intended to gain good understanding of semiotics, amongst other disciplines,

researching how signs convey meaning; how meaning is generated and how it can be

used. I wanted to use this understanding to apply and test the principles of semiotics

against current brand communication to see if the ideology of semiotics still works in

the modern world.

My reasoning in choosing branding communication relates to my studio-negotiated

project where I am developing a visual identity. Rather than just comparing any

pieces of communication, I decided to structure my dissertation by choosing

conflicting contexts.

• Applying the principles of semiotics in a current context to a brand that is

perceived as being communicated effectively. Using semiotics to decode its

meaning and establish why the execution is effective, or, perceived as being

effective.

• Applying my understanding of semiotics in a current context that has come

under criticism. A possible case of branding done poorly and using semiotics

to decode its meaning and establish whether, in fact, the execution is effective

or not.

• Testing the principles of semiotics in current branding communication by a

critical analysis experiment (focus group of people from the creative industry).

Using their individual responses to an example of branding communication to

see if the principles of semiotics work in social convention. Do their responses

all agree that the execution communicates the same messages?


4

1.3 Disciplines

“Rhetoric grasps language not as form – it is not concerned with utterance as such

– but as action.” (Todorov, 1982, 61)

The study of the sign, according to Todorov, has been considered in a “number of

disciplines.” (Todorov, 1982, 61) I have referenced several in my studies. Visual

rhetoric critiques the pure visual. I have also referenced elements of psychology,

hermeneutics and logo design principles.

1.4 The Logo

“A semiotician can help… define a system of a visual identity.” (Floch, 2000, 1)

As the theory of semiotics can be applied to any kind of sign, all kinds of media were

open. I chose to analyse the logo, the face of the brand, Silver explains “a logo is just

one element in a corporate identity system … arguably one of the most important.”

(Silver, 2001, 10)

I did question whether the logo alone was enough to provide a detailed analysis, but

as my knowledge of semiotics increased and my dissertation has developed I have

found the depth of issues concerning such a simple graphic is huge.

1.5 Nike/London 2012

My decision in choosing Nike is because of its global reputation its logo is arguably

one of the most recognizable in the world (Goldman, 1998). It is fair to assume

because of its reputation, that the logo itself is successful. I wish to use semiotics to

decode what messages and meaning make it so effective.


5

My decision in choosing the 2012 logo is because it is a very current issue, again of

global reputation. Its criticism is well known and documented and, importantly, it is

completely different to Nike, not a product but an event. The difference in the brands

mean I can take different angles and explore more, where if I simply chose Nike

compared to a failing sports manufacturer I would be limited to the confines of

specifically sport related arguments. So the aim of exploring the London 2012 logo is

to identify reasons to why it has been so badly received – is it actually an awful piece

of design or just misunderstood?

1.6 Demarcations

Although the majority of this dissertation is focused on the analysis of signs in logos,

I realise other factors can come into play which have an affect on how the logo or

brand is perceived. These have also been considered; varied circumstances affecting

the logos in different ways.

A focus of the dissertation will also aim to discover to what extent semiotics is still a

useful tool for advertising professionals. The majority of this discussion will take

place in the later stages; however, connections will be made throughout the

dissertation where appropriate.


6

2 Semiotics

This dissertation assumes little or no prior knowledge of semiotics. The study of

semiotics can become quite complex, and because I have explored theories that can

specifically relate to the logos I have identified, the work of semiotics in the case of

this dissertation therefore concerns the work of three people – Ferdinand de

Saussure, Charles Peirce, and Roland Barthes.

2.1 Linguistics

Saussure’s focus was on linguistics, he showed that the linguistic sign is arbitrary.

The linguistic sign ‘squirrel’ is arbitrary in that it has no connection either in its

sound or its visual shape, with what squirrels are really like. (Bignell, 1997, 8) We

have to learn what the sign ‘squirrel’ represents.

2.2 Signifier and Signified

In his analysis Saussure showed a sign functions in two ways.

* One- the vehicle that expresses the sign, the markings on paper, which we read as

words, or the pattern of shapes and colours on photograph is called the

‘signifier’.

* Two- the concept which springs to mind when we view the signifier is known as the

‘signified’.

The sign ‘squirrel’ does not consider a specific squirrel in reality, the signifier and

signified combine to produce the mental concept. The actual thing a sign refers to is

called a ‘referent’, so the referent of the sign ‘squirrel’ which I speak of refers to the

particular squirrel I saw in my back garden yesterday.


7

From this the semiotic model was born (Figure 1), a sign refers to an object which

we create a mental image based upon our own individual experience.

2.3 Codes and Social Semiotics

Saussure’s study revealed the importance of social meaning. Kress’s definition of

social semiotics is, “an attempt to describe and understand how people produce and

communicate meaning in specific social settings.” (Kress, van Leeuwen, 1996, 264)

For a linguistic sign to be meaningful it must exist between a group of people in a

social context. If a linguistic sign only speaks to one person it cannot be classed as a

word in language as only that individual understands its meaning.

When analysing language in a social context, Sassures’s concept of ‘code’ becomes

evident as different groups communicate in different languages. As Bignell explains,

“for talking to babies, talking to royalty, writing job applications, or writing love

poems.” (Bignell, 1997, 10).

According to Williamson, “the identity of anything depends more on what it is not

than what it is.” (Williamson, 1978, 24) Recognising the meaning of a sign can be

made from identifying what code it belongs to; by associating it with others in the

code an overall meaning is produced.

2.4 Symbol, Icon, Index

Charles Peirce built on all the principles of linguistic semiotics, focused on the ‘image’

as the same principles apply (Bignell, 1997, 14), both operate by signifier and

signified. Peirce identified that there were three kinds of sign.

1. Signs characterised by arbitrariness Peirce calls the ‘symbolic’ sign. We have to

learn and understand what the linguistic ‘s-q-u-i-r-r-e-l’ means.


8

2. Signs that produce a close likeness to its referent Peirce calls the ‘iconic’ sign.

The signified ‘squirrel’ in a photo, looks like the referent – the real squirrel a

photo represents.

3. Signs that have a concrete or causal relationship to its signified Peirce calls an

‘indexical’ sign. The signifier of an ‘acorn’ may produce the concept of a

‘squirrel’ as its signified – as we understand squirrels harvest acorns for food.

2.5 Denotation, Connotation and Myth

Roland Barthes built on the ideas and foundations of semiotics and applied them in

contemporary media.

Barthes’ analysis discovered how a sign does more than just label or ‘denote’, the

linguistic sign ‘starbucks’ denotes a particular coffeehouse chain, but can provide

extra associations, which he calls ‘connotations’. As Starbucks coffeehouses provide

comfortable seating and soft background music, they could invoke notions of

relaxing, calming and sociable atmospheres.

Barthes points out the importance of social experience, as someone who has no

understanding of Starbucks will not understand the connotations.

This leads Barthes to the realisation of ‘myth’ – a method of creating meaning, rather

than ‘myth’ in the traditional sense of stories. An advertisement for a coat which

shows a man walking out of Starbucks is not only denoting a coat and a coffeehouse,

but connotes the values of relaxation, calmness and sociability accessible from the

sign of Starbucks – suggesting a mythic meaning in which the coat are part of a ‘take

it easy’ lifestyle. Bingell explains myth as, “a collection of individual signs to create a

new meaning. The message always involves the distortion or forgetting of alternative

messages, so that myth appears to be exclusively true.” (Bignell, 1997, 22)


9

2.6 The use of Semiotics for Advertising Professionals

When exploring the different theory of semiotics it becomes evident how it can be

applied in the profession of advertising, where it can be used to evaluate ads, it can

also aid its effectiveness (Bignell, 1997, 32). Most of the theory can be used at the

most basic level in structuring an advertisement. It is fair to assume that many of

them are undertaken at an unconscious level; they are so embedded in the

advertising practice they do not reflect that they are using ‘semiotics’. As Alex

Holdsworth of Boxer design consultants explains. (Appendix 2, p39, 2.1)

The use of the signifier/signified can become credible when talking to an audience,

deciding on what imagery to use in an ad to generate a certain emotion on the

viewers’ part. E.g. an image of soap should suggest cleanliness.

Applying codes in advertising should, in theory, improve communication to a specific

target audience. Acknowledging that an audience values certain objects or converse in

certain ways can define a channel of communication. The use of a symbol, icon or

index can have a huge impact on how to communicate a message as effectively as

possible. Connoting values from a rich source can make other products appear

luxurious, which in turn creates a myth about how a product is perceived in a social

context. All of the theories different applications can create meaning, attracting the

audience writes Oliver Maltby of The Chase branding consultants. (Appendix 3,

p40, 3.1)


10

3 Nike Logo Case Study

The next phase of this dissertation analyses two logos in two different concepts based

on its global reputation. Namely, Nike perceived as being an effective logo and

London 2012 as being a criticised logo.

“To ask how images work to influence viewers’ beliefs, attitudes, and opinions is

ultimately to ask about the very nature of images and about how people respond to

them.” (Hill, Helmers, 2004, 26)

3.1 Introduction

Nike’s global awareness is huge; it is arguably the worlds most successful and well

known sports manufacturer, in a huge economy of sporting motifs and logo’s, Nike’s

swoosh is possibly the worlds most recognisable (Goldman, Papson, 1998). So loved

is it that some of the audience have even branded themselves with the swoosh,

tattooing the logo on their body (Silver, 2001). As Silver writes, “today’s most

effective logos … trigger emotion, create desire, and even forge communities.” (Silver,

2001)

Nike is a classic example of a brand that ‘moves with the times’ from its conception in

the 1970’s containing the linguistic ‘Nike’ to its modern state whereby we only require

the symbol, or the swoosh, to recognise the values of “athletic excellence, a spirit of

determination, playful self-awareness,” writes Goldman. (Goldman, Papson, 1998, 1)

3.2 Design Critique (Figure 2)

The Nike logo itself according to its creator Carolyn Davidson, took enormous

inspiration from the Greek goddess of victory, Nike. The swoosh itself is a

representation of her wing.


11

There are implications when reading signs as Bignell explains, “the first limiting

factor is the potential ambiguity of the meaning of signs, and the second is that real

readers of ads might decode signs differently, ” (Bignell, 1997, 34) leading to multiple

answers. This is because the signified derives from personal experience, which is also

formed form social convention. Therefore what one sign might signify a meaning of

religion in one culture, may signify something else in another.

The context has to be removed from the sign in order to study it; if a sign is placed

within a context it can generate a different meaning. (Bignell, 1997, 41)

There are four signs in Figure 2 all of a symbolic nature, the linguistic ‘Nike’, a

strong shape and two identical signs carrying the letter ‘R’ in a circle. In a global

convention we recognise the ‘R’ in the circle as a law abiding sign.

Bignell writes, “representations are composed of signs which are meaningful because

they belong to socially accepted codes which readers can recognise and decode.”

(Bignell, 1998, 60) The swoosh, visually, resembles a tick. A tick’s universal meaning

is one of good work, correct and approval. When we make that connection it is

evident how the values are transferred to the swoosh. It is a connotation, the swoosh

borrows the values of ‘a tick’ and places it on the Nike brand.

The function of the linguistic sign ‘Nike’ does not only act as a logo in itself but to

make a relationship to the swoosh symbol, they link themselves by the way the are

placed in the image (Williamson, 1978, 19). We cannot help but try to see a

relationship between objects – it is a human instinct. As Nike has grown into the

giant corporation it is today there has been a gradual change in how we

unconsciously understand what the swoosh alone means.

From a visual rhetoric view the logo is bold, the linguistics’ italic form suggest

movement, its leaning forward signifying it is in front, ahead, going forward.


12

The swoosh itself is clean and confident, at an angle, again suggesting a sense of

movement. The symbol backs up the linguistic, giving it extra expression. In its basic

form it is a tick, a sign of high quality. Finally, the linguistic and the shape are joined,

signifying togetherness.

3. 3 Targeting a Wider Audience

Nike does its utmost to reach as many people as possible. It has many sporting

‘departments’ such as Nike Golf, Nike Total 90, and Nike ACG, almost ‘mini brands’

within the Nike umbrella that are focused at specific audiences. Each department has

its own logo, further communicating values in a way the original Nike logo does not.

This in effect is using codes to focus its communication in a way its target audience

will understand.

Analysing Nike’s ACG (All Conditions Gear) logo (Figure 3), the two centre triangle

shapes combine to create an icon similar to a tent. The choice of typography, an

almost futuristic font, is chosen to reflect high technology used in creating the

extreme sportswear. The swoosh is still evident in the very centre of the logo, acting

almost like a crown, restating the core brand.

3.4 Competitors

Goldman explains, “every advertiser seeks to differentiate their product name and

symbol from competitors - when they use the same formulas and clichés everyone

else uses, they thwart their own purpose.” (Goldman, Papson, 1998, 2) This is evident

in analysing Nike’s logo to its competitors, spotting similarities in all of them, but

each being different. Nike tries to be different from others logos in the same type of

genre. (Williamson, 1978, 24)


13

For example, they all communicate a sense of movement – Nike with its clean

‘swoosh’; Adidas (Figure 4) with its angled shapes; Puma (Figure 5) with its

animal frozen in a jump; Reebok (Figure 6), again with angled shapes and an italic

logotype.

They all belong in a code, a code of sport and athleticism; they share attributes but

are forced to be different in their own way to be recognised to be individual from its

competitors.

3.5 Other Factors to Success

At present Nike’s advertisements are mostly celebrity endorsed. The originator of

this, it could be argued, was Michael Jordan. A massive superstar in the 1990’s, Nike

used him in their campaigns wearing their product. This then, attaches all the

attributes of Michael Jordan joined to the Nike shoes (Goldman, Papson, 1998, 2).

Here is an effective use of connotation, suggesting if you wear Nike sportswear you’ll

play/perform like Michael Jordan.

When news of increasing obesity hit the people of America in the 70’s and 80’s, a new

market emerged for the ‘fitness boom’. Not only did this create competition in low-

fat, weight reducing provisions, and exercise equipment, but most importantly in the

case of Nike – a war between sportswear manufactures, which, judged on its current

reputation, would imply it won.

3.6 Summary

There are many factors that account for a business succeeding, it cannot be judged on

its design alone. Nike is debatably unique and original, the first brand of its kind. Not

the first sportswear brand to be founded, but arguably the first sportswear

manufacturer to grasp the consumerism or even capitalism culture of America and


14

the world.

When judged on its visual identity, using semiotics to analyse and decode its

meaning, the theory of semiotics is evident is its conception. Nike is an example of

how the theory can be used to create effective design. Not just to give a face to its

brand but to target a specific audience, speaking their language and codes, as well as

differentiating it self from its competition and other signs to stand out and become a

globally recognised icon. A case any advertising professional can learn from.


15

4 London 2012 Olympic Logo Case Study

4.1 Introduction

Wolff Olins, a world-renowned and well-respected advertising agency was given the

task of producing a brand new identity for the London 2012 Olympic Games. The

unveiling of the London 2012 logo in June 2007 was instantly met by massive

negative criticism (Stocks, 2007). The underlying opinion being the identity does not

reflect the £400,000 price tag. It has been labeled ‘ugly’, which says nothing about

the Olympics, about London; some even believe that a child could do better. A flood

of alternative logos designed by the public were sent to the Olympic committee and

an online petition to have the logo scrapped received tens of thousands of signatures.

4.2 Design Critique (Figure 7)

A logo can sometimes be formed of multiple signs, as in the case of the London 2012

logo, therefore each sign that exists must be considered in relation to the others

(Bignell, 1997, 14). There are four signs in the logo (counting 2012 as one), all of

which are symbolic. The linguistic ‘London’ tells the location of the games, this sets

its function to the logo as a whole (Bignell, 1997, 42). The construction of circles

creates a symbol we all recognise that represents the Olympic Games. The focus then,

is on the bold, jagged shapes that spell out 2012. In a sense it is an invitation, we have

an occasion, venue and time. Exactly what Lord Coe explained the brand to be, using

“the Olympic spirit to inspire everyone and reach out to young people. It is an

invitation to take part and be involved.” (Lord Coe, Creative Review, 2007)

Once we have taken in the aesthetic qualities of visual, we move from analysing, to

understanding (Bignell, 1997, 40). The logo’s aesthetic quality has been compared to

that of ‘New Rave’ mostly associated with music and fashion though increasingly seen

as a cultural scene. Originating from the 1980’s rave scene, it has constantly been


16

reinvented and currently has a popular global presence especially with the young. As

Bingell explains, “the positive connotations a sign has … derive from the positive

connotations in our culture.” (Bignell, 1997, 37) This bold style, then, suggests the

London 2012 logo is connoting the same code as New Wave. A culture whose

attributes are considered diverse, loud, expressive, bright and free. The logo doesn’t

create a new meaning; it borrows meaning from a style we already distinguish.

(Williamson, 1978, 25)

On the other hand this style can provide potential ambiguity. From a visual rhetoric

view, removing the already identified Olympic logo, the logo and even the typeface

used for the linguistic ‘London’ is harsh, jagged and uneven. “It is inelegant and brash

and what does that say about London?” says Mark of Creative Review Blog, “New

Rave may be very ‘on trend’ with the fashion world this season but this still has five

years of life to live out.” (Mark, 2007)

This presents a problem, for whoever has no understanding of rave or New Wave will

not understand the code being adopted for the London 2012 logo. The logo should

create a meaning that the audience can relate to and understand. (Willamson, 1978,

12)

Since its unveiling the London 2012 logo has not been defined with a particular

colour, which can be used as a marketing tool to influence. (Lichtle, 2007)

Considering social convention, the logo refuses to be attached to a certain form, as

colour can denote different meaning in different cultures. Therefore the logo can be

modified to target different social groups whose understanding of colour and what it

represents is globally diverse.

4.3 Sponsorship Analysis

Lloyds TSB was announced as the first official sponsor of the Olympics in March

2007, an independent logo was released to show this union (Figure 9). A sponsor


17

should support the same values as the Olympic Games, its design communicates the

way a bank (Figure 8) – a service with serious, business attributes – can share and

support the 2012 London Olympics whose values “echo London’s qualities of a

modern, diverse and vibrant city,” claim Wolff Olins. (Wolff Olins, Creative Review,

2007, 39)

Ads use colour as a technique to make connections between two things. (Willamson,

1978, 24) The green and blue of the Lloyds TSB logo (Figure 8) are transferred to

the London 2012 logo, because the two signs use the exact same colour it suggests

they have the same values. (Williamson, 1978, 22)

The logo, judged on its aesthetics, has no meaning. The meaning comes when the

viewer makes the connection where the colour is passed from one sign to the other.

(Williamson, 1978, 19) However, to make this connection the viewer must already

understand the Lloyds TSB logo and how the colour has been transferred, they make

the connection because they know. (Williamson, 1978, 100)

4.4 Overcoming Criticism

“The negative reaction has come from the fact it is so different. When you are faced

with something you have not seen before, most people struggle to find something to

say. If they do not know if they like it, then they say they do not like it. Or, they look

around at what other people are saying and if they hear someone else saying they

do not like it, they will adopt that opinion.” Michael Wolff’s response when asked

about the London 2012 logo. (Michael Wolff, 2007)

Many a professional in the advertising industry will recommend taking design risks

in a creative career. It seems that that is exactly what Wolff Olins did and have been

harshly criticised for it. It risks putting other professionals off taking design risks,

creating a ‘play it safe’ industry where the design will seize to push the boundaries

and create innovative design.


18

A big response to the negative criticism has been the identity’s future direction. Lord

Coe explains, “it’s not a logo, it's a brand that will take us forward for the next five

years.” (Lord Coe, 2007) “It is typical of our profession and our country to knock this

logo before we have had a chance to see how it works,” says Jim Richardson of SUMO

design. (Richardson, 2007)

The logo has been designed so that it can be applied across a range of different media.

In the next five years technology will develop and viewers will be watching the brand

from all types of media, namely mobile devices that ownership is expected to boom.

(Mark, 2007) “This thing is going to be … made and re-made over and over again …

as a frame to be filled with images, some of which might feature Big Ben,” a view

expressed in Creative Review. (Creative Review, 2007, 39)

4.5 Previous Olympic Logos

The London 2012 solution is not the first Olympic identity to cause controversy.

When we compare some of the principles of the London logo (Figure 7) to the 1972

Munich logo (Figure 10), they are actually quite similar. “The 1972 logo had no

obvious relation to the host city or host country. It made no literal reference to sport

or to the Olympic ideas. And, unlike London, it did not even include the rings,”

(Figures 11-13) describes Patrick Burgoyne, editor of Creative Review. (Burgoyne,

Creative Review, 2007) In its day the Munich identity must have caused massive

debate at the time, now it is highly regarded – how could we know that would not

happen for the London logo?

Considering the negative criticism of the logo’s ambiguity, it is important to note it

has also drawn positive opinions on how it character differs from previous Olympic

identities, or in some cases how it is the same. (Thompson, 1980, 23)

“It avoids all the go-to pratfalls of current logo design. No brushstrokes! No feathered

drop shadows! No mirrored reflections! No gradients, patriotic colours, rainbows,


19

ribbons, landmarks, symbols of unity, maps, swooshes or globes,” a view expressed in

Creative Review. (Creative review, 2007, 38)

4.6 Summary

In all the debate, ultimately, the design is fragile, possibly a failure. The mass amount

of criticism is too hard to ignore, as Darral Lambert of Barques design explains.

(Appendix 4, p42, 4.1) If it were successful its reception would be of a positive

nature. Maybe Wolff Olins were too bold and original in their approach, took too big

a risk, or maybe the logo will unfold over the next five years and end up being

something everyone loves?

However, if you consider the target audience that has repeatedly been emphasised as

being the young, its values may well speak to them in a way it won’t to other social

groups, for that reason, the logo may well be a success.

There appears to be conflicting views between the general pubic and professional

advertisers. Perhaps they can see how it works, as they are able to decode the identity

to see what values it’s trying to achieve, they see its potential in ways the general

public cannot as Griffiths explains. (Appendix 1, p37, 1.1)

Semiotic use in a successful logo is just as viable when analysing and decoding a

badly criticised one. In this case study the semiotic theory can demonstrate how

targeting a specific audience can work by borrowing existing codes to generate

meaning, and how complicated an issue it can be attempting to communicate to such

a diverse audience. The use of colour in a semiotic sense provides a method of

creating meaning without necessarily using a photograph or linguistic sign.

This case study also brings the advertising professional to the very centre of the

account. To suggest the advertising professionals have failed in their use of semiotics


20

to create a successful identity would imply the use of semiotics is not essentially a

useful tool. However this view is too extreme and there are many factors to argue this

case. Not to mention this is the beginning of a five-year journey in which the logo

with evolve.

The faults of the London 2012 logo may not lie with Wolff Olins, they produced the

identify from a brief given by the Olympic committee. It may be their profile of what

they want the games to be that is the source of the problem.


21

5 Conclusion

To end the dissertation I conducted a short experiment, gaining the opinions of

advertising professionals’ views on the London 2012 logo. If semiotics remains a

useful tool in the industry then their answers should be the same or similar, as the

theory should decode the ‘true answer(s)’.

5.1 Critical Analysis Experiment

In analysing the answers of the advertising professionals there appears to be praise

on how the application of the logo is its strength, (Appendix 1, p37, 1.2) whereas

the styling, aesthetics and structure of the logo itself comes under question,

(Appendix 1, p37, 1.3) (Appendix 3, p40, 3.2) (Appendix 4, p42, 4.2) as a

result its impression is a disappointment. (Appendix 4, p42, 4.3)

However there is a feeling the logo’s reaction has meant the identity has done its job,

(Appendix 3, p40, 3.3) (Appendix 5, p43, 5.1) with an understanding that the

logos creation was never going to be straightforward when attempting to talk to an

audience so large and diverse. (Appendix 5, p43, 5.2)

Overall the opinions appear to point criticism at the aesthetics, the 80’s look, which is

meant to express ideas of what London and the Olympics are about. Other views

could be put down to personal taste, however some of the views expressed are

supported by quotes throughout this dissertation suggesting two things, one, the

intended meanings of the logo are working because people on a broad scale are

identifying them. Two, semiotics is being deployed successfully as people are able to

decode the same aspects.

5.2 Implications

The experiment has implications that affect the outcome. Four participants took part

in total, for a more reliable result that figure would need to be increased. There is an


22

issue with the participants’ knowledge of semiotics as it may be limited. They may

have studied it and used it at an unconscious level but do not see the need to define it

as semiotics. As the signified comes from experience, a sign’s meaning could be

different for each person; they may come from different social groups.

Such a small experiment cannot account for the entire advertising profession and

should not be taken as a definitive answer.

5.3 To What Extent is Semiotics Still a Useful Tool for Advertising

Professionals?

“Semiotics is still an essential analytical perspective for studying the media,” claims

Bignell. (Bignell, 1997, 205) Both case studies demonstrate how the use of semiotics

can assist in creating either an effective or flawed solution in the advertising industry,

but most importantly the theory can be used to break down the very meaning, and

pin-point what signs are communicating what. Fundamentally, the design can be

improved.

If a design does not work – in the case of the London 2012 identity – then semiotics

can be employed to decode it and discover its weaknesses. At which point semiotics

can then be used to construct the correct meaning generating an effective outcome.

In turn, semiotics can also be used in successful design, in the case of the Nike logo,

to discover why and how it is successful, an invaluable lesson for any designer.

From my research it is fair to assume that many of the principles and methods of

semiotics are practised instinctively. Professionals know of it, but maybe not in detail.

They are imbedded in the way creativity has been taught and now put into practice.

Over time the theoretical term ‘semiotics,’ is forgotten but its principles still remain

at an unconscious level, Griffiths explaining its importance. (Appendix 1, p38, 1.4)


23

The theory is core to how we create meaning and how we perceive it, it is something

that will never change and is a science too important to ignore. If anything semiotics

should be used more in the industry agrees Griffiths, (Appendix 1, p38, 1.5) too

often do we see ineffective design.

5.4 Suggestions for Further Work

Having established semiotics could be practised at an unconscious level it is another

question to ask if forgetting the source and continuing to work instinctively is a bad

thing. Many other areas of practice such as science and geography have many of their

own theories, whereas it could be said studying visual communication tends to

borrow theories from other practices. Semiotics is essentially philosophy, should it

exist as a prime theory when practicing in the advertising industry? Should the

industry acknowledge semiotics more?

Squaw Valley California 1960, Mexico 1968, Munich 1972 and Montreal 1976, are all

design systems which like the London 2012 identity shocked because of its

originality. It would be interesting to analyse the reaction to those previous Olympic

identities and how it differs or is similar to the criticism received for the London 2012

logo.


24

6. Media texts

Figure 1

Dillman, Richard (2003) The Semiotic Model [illustration] IN Dillman, Richard

Happy Fun Communication Land, Signs and Language.

http://www.rdillman.com/HFCL/TUTOR/Semiotics/sem1.html [updated

26/09/2003, viewed 15/11/2007].


25

Figure 2

Nike Brand Logo (2000) [illustration] IN Best Brands of the World – Vector

Logotypes and Logos.

http://brandsoftheworld.com/brands/?id=2516 [updated 24/01/2004, viewed

02/12/2007]


26

Figure 3

ACG Brand Logo (2001) [illustration] IN Best Brands of the World – Vector



02/12/2007]


27

Figure 4

Adidas Brand Logo (2006) [illustration] IN Best Brands of the World – Vector



02/12/2007]


28

Figure 5

Puma Brand Logo (2002) [illustration] IN Best Brands of the World – Vector



02/12/2007]


29

Figure 6

Reebok Brand Logo (2003) [illustration] IN Best Brands of the World – Vector



02/12/2007]


30

Figure 7

London 2010 Brand Logo (2007) [illustration] IN Best Brands of the World – Vector



02/12/2007]


31

Figure 8

Lloyds TSB Brand Logo (2003) [illustration] IN Best Brands of the World – Vector



09/12/2007]


32

Figure 9

Lloyds TSB Sponsors London 2012 Olympics (2007) [illustration] IN Lloyds TSB -

Media Centre, Photo Archive - Campaign Image.

http://www.mediacentre.lloydstsb.com/mc/photo_archive/2012/olympics4.asp

[updated n.d. viewed 09/12/2007]


33

–

Figure 10

Aicher, Otl (1972 ) Munich 1972 Logo [illustration] IN CR Blog, Blog Archive, But

What Would They Have Made Of This?

http://www.creativereview.co.uk/crblog/wp-

content/uploads/2007/06/munich1972.jpg [updated 07/06/2007, viewed

11/12/2007]


34

Figure 11

Aicher, Otl (1972 ) Munich Olympics 1972, Olympic Stadium (Munich) [illustration]

IN Antikewl Daily, Munich 1972 = Good, London 2012 = Bad.

http://antikewl.com/daily/2007/06/12/munich-1972-good-london-2012-bad/

[updated n.d viewed 12/12/2007]


35

Figure 12

Aicher, Otl (1972 ) Munich Olympics 1972, Pentathlon [illustration] IN The Movie

Poster Art Gallery, Travel, Advertising and Historical Posters.

http://www.mpag.co.uk/genpage1.html [updated 25/09/2007, viewed 12/12/2007]


36

Figure 13

Aicher, Otl (1972 ) Munich Olympics 1972, Gymnast [illustration] IN Secher,

Benjamin, Telegraph, A winning Way With Symbols.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2007/02/17/baotl117.xml

[updated 17/02/2007, viewed 12/12/2007]


37

7. Appendix

Appendix 1

Re: The Use of Semiotics in the Advertising Industry.

From: Dan Griffiths ([email protected])

Sent: 08 January 2008 11:28:43

To: Liam Churchard ([email protected])

Hello mate,

Yeah no probs, answers bellow. Thought I’d get it done now otherwise I’ll forget :)

1) Could you please state your full name, job position and what it

entails.

Dan Griffiths - Head of Design Glue London - this entails a combination of team

management and creating and producing interactive digital advertising

2) Could you please give a short design critique of the London 2012

Olympic logo? (150 words max)

It's very easy to jump on the bandwagon here and criticise this logo. After all it is a

very high profile piece of communication and is supposed to represent a nation and

its attitude to sport.

(1.2) I’m not a fan of the execution but I do like some of the thinking behind the logo.

My understanding was that this logo was supposed to evolve and change over time. A

principal that could be very interesting and unique to logo design.

(1.3) However the styling of the logo left a lot to be desired. The use of colour and

shapes, rather than trying to represent our nations vibrancy and multi-culturalism

feels very eclectic and dated. It’s not a logo I particularly warm too. Having said that

it would be interesting to find out what the general publics feel about this logo.

(1.1) Its difficult as a designer to have a completely objective opinion on the logo.


38

3) Do you agree the use of semiotics in the advertising industry is

important?

It's absolutely vital. Art direction in a piece of work is extremely important in

communicating a message on levels other than the obvious ones. Get it wrong and no

matter how good the product is that you are selling the impression given by the

advertising can destroy the viewers desire for that product.

4) In my research to date it is fair to assume that many of the principles

and methods of semiotics are practiced instinctively. Professionals

know of it, but maybe not in detail. They are imbedded in the way

creatives have been taught and now practice at an unconscious level. Do

you agree to this statement?

Partially yes, there is an unconscious level to semiotics which exists in all of us and

this can be drawn upon to give an opinion on a simplistic level based upon how you

read the signs. However it is much more difficult to use signs to evoke a feeling in

others. For this we need to look at deeper at well established theories and principals

based upon human physiology.

(1.4) We cannot afford to simply rely on gut instinct and personal opinion as this is

on the whole subjective. We need to draw on the principals and proven theories of

semiotics in order to produce deeper levels of communication and ensure our

message is understood by its audience.

(1.5) I would agree that this skill is not practiced enough by advertising

professionals.

Hope this helps,

Dan

Griffiths, Dan (2008) RE: The Use of Semiotics in the Advertising Industry.

[[email protected]] [sent on: 08/01/2008].


39

Appendix 2


From: Alex Holdsworth ([email protected])

Sent: 10 January 2008 18:10:11


Hiya Liam,

In terms of semiotics, depending on what your definition of semiotics is, as I believe a

typed language, is actually a form of semiotics.

(2.1) Obviously you can imagine we don't consciously decide whether we will use

them for specific identities/ advertising etc, usually an idea comes about from loads

of development and will reflect the medium/client and circumstances etc and if it's

got symbols/graphic icons in, then so be it. I think what I'm saying is that we use

semiotics if it's relevant, which often it is.

Al

Holdsworth, Alex (2008) RE: The Use of Semiotics in the Advertising Industry.



40

Appendix 3


From: Oliver Maltby ([email protected])

Sent: 14 January 2008 11:02:16


Hi Liam,

I have done my best to answer the questions below. If you need any more

information, feel free to call.

1) Oliver Maltby, Senior Designer.

My role entails all elements of the design process from start to finish. From

developing briefs with clients, through to delivering projects, project managing,

making design schedules and estimating for jobs, looking after and nurturing the

design team as well as looking for new business opportunities. I also design a bit. In

larger studios some of these responsibilities are handled by specific people, but The

Chase London office is small so we get more involved at every level of the process.

2) In general, the 2012 logo has been roundly panned by the design press. I find this

a disappointing response that shows how unprofessional design industry still is. As

design groups, we still have a mentality that we could all do better, and in the aid of

self promotion we're going to tell you all about it. This one-

upmanship undermines our industry as a whole. Even if people don't like it they

should have dignity in silence. Personally, I like it.

(3.2) I do worry about the 80's revival being a flash in the pan.

(3.3) But I like the fact it has had such a powerful reaction around the world has

made it stand out. No such thing as bad publicity. Plus, why would we want to be a


41

part of the generic branding most Olympics have received. We should be proud to be

different.

3 & 4) Signs are a representation of a concept or form of translating information

between humans and animals. This has happened since the dawn of time and goes far

beyond the relatively new practice of design or advertising. So, yes it is used

in advertising, but its used in every form of life, from waving across a round to a

scream.

(3.1) Everybody practices semiotics to a certain level. However, in advertising and

design professional take our understanding of signs, signals, smells and touch and

combine these basic human senses to make people feel or think a certain way about a

product or environment.

Let me know if this is OK, if you need anything else please call or email.

Oli.

Maltby, Oliver (2008) RE: The Use of Semiotics in the Advertising Industry.



42

Appendix 4

Re: Dissertation‏

From: Darral Lambert ([email protected])

Sent: 16 January 2008 10:53:09


Hi Liam,

This logo looks like a bad piece of artwork from a six year old.

(4.2) The name London and the Olympic rings appear to be afterthoughts once the

staggered 2012 is formed. It does not convey a strong sense of the city in which the

games are being held, which seems like a missed opportunity for a global event. The

colours are garish and again without meaning in the context of the games which has a

historic colour palette.

There may be more to understand about the logo as we approach the date and the

constituent parts may become clearer, (4.3) but it fails to deliver a meaningful

message from the first impression and therefore without a clear explanation has lost

much of its possible impact.

In short, (4.1) it's going to need further clarification to be understood, which is, in

my view, a sign that it fails to do its job.

Regards

Lambert, Darral (2008) RE: Dissertation.



43

Appendix 5

Re: Dissertation‏

From: Ian Cooper ([email protected])

Sent: 17 January 2008 14:12:43


Hello Liam,

Personally I like the 2012 logo,

(5.2) I think that designing something that will appeal and inspire people in 6 years

time, as the designers had to do, is a very difficult job. They had to overlook current

design trends and create something that will have lasting appeal to a huge target

audience. The Olympic logo has to appeal to people of all ages, races and class

backgrounds and not just in the UK but worldwide, as such there will always be

people who will criticise and people who don't get it. I think that the logo they have

come up with is fresh, vibrant and versatile. I also think that people will grow to like

it over time and that it will have lasting appeal.

(5.1) It is a brave piece of design and it is a bold statement but surely that's what we

want the logo of the London Olympic games to stand for. If the logo does nothing

else, it provokes a strong reaction, which is never a bad thing.

Ian

Cooper, Ian (2008) RE: Dissertation.



44

8. Bibliography

Bignell, Jonathan (1997) Media Semiotics. Manchester: Manchester University press,

ISBN 0-7190-4500-2.

Burgoyne, Patrick (2007) Editorial/Comments. Creative Review, June, 2007, p6.

Coe, Lord (2007 ) [quote] IN Austin, Simon (2007) London 2012 team defend new

logo.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/olympics_2012/6722763.stm

[updated 05/06/2007, viewed 17/12/2007]

Cooper, Ian (2008) RE: Dissertation. [[email protected]] [sent on: 17/01/2008].

Creative Review (2007) 2012: Pro or Con? Creative Review, June, 2007, p38-39.

Floch, Jean-Marie (2000) Visual identities. London, Continuum, ISBN 0826447384.

Goldman, Robert; Papson, Stephen (1998) Nike Culture: The Sign of the Swoosh.

London, Sage Publications Inc.

Griffiths, Dan (2008) RE: The Use of Semiotics in the Advertising Industry.


Hill, Charles; Helmers, Marguerite (2004) Defining Visual Rhetoric. Mahwah,

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Holdsworth, Alex (2008) RE: The Use of Semiotics in the Advertising Industry.



45

Kress, Gunther; Van Leeuwen, Theo (1996) Reading Images: The Grammar of

Visual Design. London, Routledge, ISBN: 0-415-10599-4.

Lambert, Darral (2008) RE: Dissertation. [[email protected]] [sent on:

16/01/2008].

Lichtle. Marie-Christine (2007) The effect of an advertisements colour on emotions

evoked by an ad and attitude towards the ad. International Journal of Advertising,

26 (1), p37-62.

Maltby, Oliver (2008) RE: The Use of Semiotics in the Advertising Industry.


Mark (2007) CR Blog, London 2012. Well, at least it doesn’t have Big Ben on it.

http://www.creativereview.co.uk/crblog/london-2012-well-at-least-it-doesnt-have-

big-ben-on-it/ [updated 04/06/2007, viewed 10/12/2007]

Patrick, CR Blog (2007) But What Would They Have Made Of This?

http://www.creativereview.co.uk/crblog/but-what-would-they-have-made-of-this/

[updated 07/06/2007, viewed 10/12/2007]

Richardson, Jim (2007) Olympic 2012 branding backlash ‘damages profession’.

Design Week, June, 07.06.07, p3.

Silver, Lisa (2001) Logo Design that Works: Secrets for Successful Logo Design.

[Beverly, Massachusetts] Rockport publishers, Inc, ISBN 1-56496-759-X.

Stocks, Claire (2007) New 2012 logo sparks huge response.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/sporteditors/2007/06/new_2012_logo_sparks_big_ba

ckl.html [updated 04/06/2007, viewed 17/12/2007]


46

Thompson, Brett (1980) Olympiad: A Graphic Celebration. San Diego; New York,

The Tantivy Press, ISBN: 0-498-02514-4.

Todorov, Tzvetan (1982) Theories of the Symbol. Ithaca, Cornell University Press,

ISBN: 0-8014-1192-0.

Williamson, Judith (1978) Decoding Advertisements: Ideology and Meaning in

Advertisements. London, Marion Boyars.

Wolff Olins (2007 [quote] IN Creative Review (2007) 2012: Pro or Con? Creative

Review, June, 2007, p38-39.

Wolff, Michael (2007) [quote] IN Geary, Joanna (2007) Answers: Michael Wolff

http://joannageary.wordpress.com/2007/10/29/answers-michael-wolff/ [updated

11/11/2007, viewed 17/12/2007]

Woods, Sarah (2007) Olympic 2012 branding backlash ‘damages profession’. Design

Week, June, 07.06.07, p3.

Thank you for taking the time to review my work, I appreciate your interest. Any feedback or comments are most welcome.

Copyright & Creative Commons Licence. Liam Churchard | Graphic Design

Email

[email protected]

www.liamchurchard.co.ukBlog

www.liamchurchard.co.uk/blogTwitter

http://twitter.com/LiamChurchard

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/

http://www.liamchurchard.co.uk/

http://www.liamchurchard.co.uk/blog

http://twitter.com/LiamChurchard

Documents

To What Extent is Semiotics Still a Useful Tool For Advertising Professionals?