A PR War Triggered by a Graphic Design Choice

As my colleague, Tim Kane has said, “People don’t buy brands. They join them.”

This was amply demonstrated this summer when Ikea unleashed a major global brouhaha by swapping its signature typeface — a customized version of Futura — for Verdana, a simpler, cheaper and more widely available font, originally created by Microsoft specifically to be used on the Web. (On his blog, Mattias Åkerberg compares and contrasts the two fonts.)

The reaction was swift and passionate. An article by Lisa Abend in TIME magazine quotes some typical responses: “‘Ikea, stop the Verdana madness!’ pleaded Tokyo's Oliver Reichenstein on Twitter. ‘Words can't describe my disgust,’ spat Ben Cristensen of Melbourne. ‘Horrific,’ lamented Christian Hughes in Dublin.”

In my opinion, the real problem is that Ikea is widely known for the unpretentious and simple — but beautiful — design of its furniture. Its original typeface fit the company’s style and, thus, supported the company’s brand. With the switch to Verdana, Ikea seems, to its some of its most hardcore fans, to be surrendering its originality and credibility for expediency … and violating its brand promise.

The Power of a Well-Managed Brand

My politics are my own business, but I have to give “props” to the team behind the Barack Obama branding initiative.

Not only is the campaign’s red, white and blue logo — an “O” which evokes a rising sun — simple, effective and easily identifiable, but it sometimes seems as if the campaign’s volunteers have been issued copies of a style manual … and they’re actually paying careful attention to it! Campaign communiqués are all set in Gotham, an elegantly simple font that gives a very American look to all the campaign’s communications, including its website.

In the interest of bipartisanship — and because this blog entry should in no way be construed as an endorsement of any political candidate — you should also check out the websites of candidates John McCain and Hillary Clinton for comparison.