Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
THE new brand identity for the Borough:—"I am in"
New brand identity strategy for Haringey
"I am in"
Discuss.
CDC
Haringey Councillor
Liberal Democrat Party
---
update to mark the 'soft launch' (click to enlarge):—
The £20,000 film, The Haringey Story
Tags for Forum Posts: I am in, Local Government, brand strategy, folly, identity, nonsense, vanity, waste of money
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Shem Law on
-
Clive, a more measured response, thank you. First things first, please don't think that all this negative media coverage you quote (and link to) means anything. I've worked in newspapers and magazines for 30 years... A story like this is bread and butter to a journalist, the archives are full of them. People don't like change, so it's simple to talk to 'outraged of Highgate' for some ' I hate it' quotes, then let's get a member of the council opposition to tell us how much it cost and what better causes that money could be spent on... Hey presto! A good 'knee jerk story' that'll stir up people, bad news and negative stories sell newspapers... You only have to pick up a copy of the Daily Mail to see what I mean, social media is no different. Hugh here at HoL is cock-a-hoop that this thread runs to 11 pages at the last count and has 125 replies, he needs the unique users and page impressions to make HoL even more successful. No Clive, the media is not your friend. They will turn anyone and everyone over, and because this story just features people not liking change or outraged that it is a waste of money, They will drop it as quickly as they picked it up. The money spent wasn't stolen, embezzled or blown on drugs and prostitutes... tomorrow's chip paper I'm afraid.
The truth is Clive, and I admit I didn't realise this at first, it is your duty to hold the Labour councillors to account, but what drew my eye to your original post was the utter glee which you couldn't keep out of that post, "look how these idiots have screwed up!" The "now we've really got them" tone was pretty unseemly and not what I would expect from my councillor. That's what I objected to. If you had just stated the facts, perhaps pointed out what that money could have been spent on, and asked genuinely, as to what other people thought it would have perhaps been more dignified reaction, but no matter.
All rebranding gets a negative reaction. The first thing you tell the client before embarking on such a project, is "this, in the short term is going to cause you PR problems and you will at best receive indifferent feedback, and at worst, lots of negative publicity. It always happens, whether you're British Airways or Coca Cola. But if you think in the long term what you want to achieve with the rebranding, is worth it, and you can ride the storm, go ahead".
It takes a pretty brave CEO to accept that and to 'push the button', no one wants that sort of grief on their watch. Would you Clive? I mean, if at the last election, those labour Tottenham wards had voted Lib Dem, and you were looking at trying to signal to the people of Haringey that there were seismic changes at Haringey Council, would you do it? Who knows...? But however misguided you think the present regime is, it took some 'cojones'...
Once they went ahead and the 'creatives' got the brief and down to work, something else happens, a designer or team of designers will do countless designs and present them, all the while hoping whoever makes the decision will pick the right one, but they will also come up with some utterly meaningless 'design-speak' drivel to justify the design and the bill, the client then needs that drivel to then justify the bill to the shareholders or the public. It's a vicious circle, that drivel will then be used by the press to criticise the design. We as designers always do it, because " Choose this one, you visually illiterate pillock, it's the best one, trust me I know" never goes down too well with a client.
Let's look at your second point, you think we should see the logo as childish. Perhaps, but here is a handy tip Clive, people are pretty good at looking at things and deciding if they like them or not, it's an inbuilt ability in everyone of us, and we've been doing it for millennia... Yes, you can simplify complex arguments for people, help them understand, but with visual things like this we are more than capable of knowing our own minds, it really doesn't help that you and Alan are so desperate for people to agree with you that you attach jokey images, "look at this, it's a bit like that new logo, and it's rubbish too, or it must be childish because it looks a bit like this kid's restaurant logo". People will decide without you pushing them... Trust me they're really good at it, it's as if you don't trust them to make the correct decision.
Finally let's talk about your first point, yes, I'm sure politics is about choices, often as not, really quite tough choices. Most of the problems in your Highgate ward, would probably be classed as 'first world problems' some of the problems over towards Tottenham are probably more pressing I would suggest. Down the hill, here on Green Lanes, I'd say we have a bit of both, but on balance probably more Highgate problems than Tottenham... I'm sure there are many people here that think the rebranding is a waste of money, many more in Tottenham, less so in Highgate, where 86k wouldn't buy a garage. They may be right, but other capital cities think that design, signage and public art are a vital part of a healthy and happy community. Barcelona, Berlin, and Amsterdam are just three that I can think of. London has always been pretty backward in it's attitude to these things. It's a shame, as they can make a real difference. You should open your mind to the possibilities Clive, rather than dismiss out of hand.
The truth is Clive, this new logo will date pretty quickly... Five years or so I'd say, so let's just hope your running the council when a new one has to be chosen. My rates are pretty reasonable, why not give me a call...?
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
Alan, I recommend that you pick up a copy of today's Ham&High Broadway, where there is much coverage of the new branding identity. Alongside a letter on the subject by my Highgate Cllr. colleague (Liz Morris), the Cabinet Member most responsible for this publishes an opinion column.
In that column, the Cabinet Member says (I'm paraphrasing) that the area of Haringey is too much associated with the Council. That is why the name "Council" has been dropped in the latest re-brand (I'd point out that the Borough of Haringey is a relatively recent and artificial construct, it being welded together from three smaller Boroughs in 1965).
Is this not a tacit admission that the Council has negative connotations for some, including for would-be developers?
The paradox is that the widely controversial decision by the Council to spend such a sum—in these times—simply reinforces those connotations.
-
Permalink Reply by StephenBln on
-
That is why the name "Council" has been dropped in the latest re-brand (I'd point out that the Borough of Haringey is a relatively recent and artificial construct, it being welded together from three smaller Boroughs in 1965).
Come on Clive. I do understand your desire to keep the LD's profile in the public domain. But continuing this rubbish certainly won't help your cause.
Artificial?? The majority, I would imagine 65% of Haringey's population is younger than 50 and have no idea of the previous set up of London's local authorities, having never known anything else than the current Local authority.
Yes, I understand why you continue to rubbish the current set up and dream of the rebirth of 'nice and tidy middle class' Hornsey UDC, a new Crouch Hill to Highgate & Muswell Hill LD utopia of moral goodness, which could mean the coming to power and control of 'a' fiefdom for the LDs. But it ain't gonna happen. If you look at Paris and Berlin you'll see that the trend is for larger boroughs and not going back to smaller units. London will no doubt follow and I suggest that some other authorities such as Epping Forest District, Broxbourne and Epsom and Ewell may well be brought into Greater London over the next decade or so.Paris 2016 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Paris
Berlin 23 to 12 Boroughs 2001 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berliner_Bezirke
-
Permalink Reply by JJ B on
-
In fact, there is no reason why we should have these artificial boundaries that dictate how London's wealth is not distributed e.g Haringey is an 'outer London borough that means our schools get less resources than Islington!
Health, social and educaction budgets should come from the mayors office and include precepts from the City. After all, Transport for London dictates that we have a detrimental, five lane trunk road running through Tottenham at Seven Sisters! Has any party suggested this sort of revolution?
-
-
Yes, I would agree with you to a certain point.
I also think street cleaning is another area where a London-wide authority for 'Cleaner Streets' could be much more efficient. As an example, my own city of Berlin which incinerates all non recylable waste to create electricity, hot water and community heating through the city's 'waste to energy' programme.
Nevertheless, there are certainly things, such as responsibilty for Parks, pedestrian areas and others, that are better run at a local level.
-
-
Absolutely JJ B. Haringey Council swallowed up by Islington or Camden for example. Probably be better run.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
There have been ideas thrown around for several years about the creation of London super boroughs; maybe dividing London into 5, 6 or 7 depending on how you want to cut it. I think it makes a lot of sense as neighbours tend to share a lot of issues that don't just stop at the borough boundary. Also, the sheer spending power of a smaller number of boroughs could wring out savings by not duplicating procurement. Interestingly the main opposition to taking the ideas forward seem to be the leaders of the 32 boroughs.
-
-
Clive, do you have a link to the Ham & High article. Couldn't see it in their online edition. However there is news that Barnet council staff are going on strike because of privatisation. Didn't Haringey's current CEO come from Barnet?
-
-
Dave:
No.
Copies of the H&H Broadway are available in several Haringey Libraries, except Marcus Garvey Library, that the Council has closed for many months. Paper copies are sold in newsagents.
However, the whole newspaper should be available online in a sophisticated electronic version within the next 48 hours, from a link on this web page. Make sure you click on the icon near the bottom, for Broadway Ham and High. Needs a relatively powerful computer.
Yes.
I understand the CEO currently employed by Haringey Council was formerly CEO of Barnet Council.
-
Permalink Reply by Zena Brabazon on
-
I can't find the article online but from what you are saying Clive, this is now becoming surreal. The London Borough of Haringey is an administrative unit run by an elected Council. As such it has local government responsibilities, statutory duties and is democratically accountable. It has to manage very serious business like child protection, adult social care, enforcement and many other things not so glitzy as being an attitude. So what exactly is Joe Goldberg saying? He is in the Cabinet, running a Council so how can he and his colleagues how can they dissociate themselves from what they do? Haringey is not a marketing agency, it is a local government body and the Council's signs, stationery and other symbols should reflect that.
Zena Brabazon
-
-
I've had a quick look at the borough logos on this page (scroll down a bit)
http://www.harringayonline.com/forum/topics/haringey-council-s-new-...
5 use the term Council
9 Royal or London Borough of
4 (including now Haringey) just the word London
The rest just use the name of the borough
No consistent approach as far as I can see.
I've always disliked the use of the word "Council" when boroughs describe themselves. The council is the elected body and can change. The borough is a geographical place which remains fairly constant. Either use Borough or nothing at all.
-
-
Good morning Zena,
I agree with the points you make about the Council continuing to be responsible for discharging serious functions of Local Government: rather than some kind of joky funky, start-up company. The logo lacks any gravitas.
The E-version of yesterday's Broadway is now available online here.
However I've created a two-page pdf (below) of pages 4 and 24 that deal with our identity rebrand.
Some points to note:
- The H&H strap-line refers to "[a] long design and consultation process". While there may have been a long internal consultation, there has not been long – or any – public consultation.
- A resident (Mr. Karl Aussia) – who works for city branding specialist Evolve – has offered to undertake a new rebranding of Haringey for free (presumably he thinks the design could be improved).
- The Council (apparently) claims it consulted residents "before creating the rebranding design" – I'm not convinced the Council has claimed that, but there has been a great deal of bluster associated with the "soft launch"
- The letter of my Highgate Councillor colleague Liz Morris is at the bottom left of page 24, She makes the point that many of us have: the poor timing.
- An opinion column appears on the right side of p.24: it's penned by the Council's cabinet member for economic development and social inclusion. Inter alia, he writes:
For too many people who see the word “Haringey” they think of little else than the council. This simply has to change. Haringey must mean more than the council that governs a geographical area.
…
As Marcus Garvey said, “with confidence you have won before you have started”.
- The main letter on page 24 is about Haringey's cuts to services to the elderly. I can think of a way the elderly could have had at least £86,000 more spent on their services, if the Council had chosen.
- Attachments:
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
