Why am I not surprised?

[inulro]

Not only is the new logo for the London Olympics hideous[1] (though some of the public's alternate logos were really attractive; I particularly like the one that looks like a London street sign), the promotional video triggers epileptic fits.

[1] So hideous, in fact, that I'm not posting a link to it.

Unlike many people, I've been reasonably positive about having the Olympics in England, but if they can't do something as basic as have a logo that doesn't make people puke, and get so caught up in the cleverness of their video that they don't even consider Ofcom regulations regarding flashing images, it really doesn't bode well.

Comments

[miss-soap.livejournal.com]

A couple of people - myself included - believe it's a giant PR stunt designed to create publicity. The new! improved! logo will be unveiled in a few weeks and there'll be a lot of guff about 'bowing to the public's opinion' and stuff.

[badnewswade.livejournal.com]

(looks up logo)

Urgh. That is disgusting. A toileting monkey is right. But then the Olympics have been about big business sucking up tax money and crapping all over the host city for a while now, so it's not exactly inappropriate. And what's this shit about how they're going to demolish all the cheap housing in East London to build the flipping thing? I heard they'd done this in Barcelona, too...

[inulro.livejournal.com]

I have to admit the thought has crossed my mind too.

Cos they can't seriously mean to foist a design as bad as that on the world, can they? Er - I hope.

[ankaret.livejournal.com]

Oh dear, I don't really understand that logo at all. Is it supposed to say LO 12?

[meltie.livejournal.com]

It's supposed to be Lisa Simpson giving head.