Many designers have waxed admiringly about Barack Obama’s sophisticated typographical design scheme, particularly the consistent use in much of his graphic material of the typeface Gotham, designed by Tobias Frere-Jones. So I called Brian Collins, an expert on branding, to get his thoughts on what this “good design” means for the candidate.
Steven Heller: As a branding expert, can you tell me what it is about the typographical scheme of Senator Obama’s campaign that is unlike his challengers’?
Campaign poster. (Barackobama.com)
Brian Collins: John McCain’s, Hillary Clinton’s and Barack Obama’s campaigns all make good efforts to brand their messages consistently. And that’s incredibly hard to do. Just imagine the thousands of volunteers and endless elements they must orchestrate from town to town, state to state. But as a result of their approach to design, the Obama campaign really stands out. From the bold “change” signs to their engaging Web site to their recognizable lapel pins, they’ve used a single-minded visual strategy to deliver their campaign’s message with greater consistency and, as a result, greater collective impact. The use of typography is the linchpin to the program. Type is language made visible. Senator Obama has been noted for his eloquence, so it’s not surprising that someone so rhetorically gifted would understand how strong typography is and how it helps bring his words — and his campaign’s message — to life.
Q: The other campaigns are less typographically successful. Is maintaining a strong design program really so difficult?
A: I think the real story here is less about typography than it is about discipline. Political campaigns are the Brigadoon of branding. There’s a compressed amount of time to tell a candidate’s story before the race is over and the campaign vanishes. During that window, the campaign must make sure that everything it produces — everything it touches — delivers the candidate’s message in a meaningful way. No opportunity to amplify that story should be missed. The Obama people have used design to take that discipline to a whole new level.
(From Barackobama.com)
Barack Obama is running the first real transmedia campaign of the 21st century. His people not only understand how media has splintered, but how audiences have splintered, too. Cell phones, mobile devices, Web sites, e-mail, social networks, iPods, laptops, billboards, print ads and campaign events are now just as important as television. The senator’s design strategy has given these diverse platforms (and their different audiences) a coherence that makes them all work together. I’ve worked with giant, global corporations who don’t do it this well.
Q: What is it about the typeface Gotham that adds personality to the Obama brand?
A: I don’t think that Gotham adds any personality to Senator Obama’s brand. I think it just amplifies the personality that’s already there. In fact, the typeface would work just as well for John McCain or Hillary Clinton, for that matter.
With that said, though, there’s an oxymoronic quality to Gotham, which is why I think it’s become so popular. It has a blunt, geometric simplicity, which usually makes words feel cold and analytical (like Univers), but it also feels warm. It’s substantial yet friendly. Up-to-date yet familiar. That’s a tough hat trick. And Gotham has another quality that makes it succeed: it just looks matter-of-fact. But perhaps any typeface inspired by signs at the Port Authority Bus Terminal in New York City — as Gotham is — will look like that.
Q: Could this have been accomplished with other typeface(s)?
A: Yes. But most of them have been crafted within the last decade or so. Newer fonts don’t carry as much historical visual baggage for candidates looking to the future instead of the past. Among them would be a typeface called Whitney.
Button. (From Barackobama.com)
We used it in the new identity program we did for Kodak. It has many of the same qualities I like in Gotham. But Whitney’s roots are in calligraphy, not geometry. So it’s a bit more handmade, more friendly.
Q: What is the most significant trait that emerges from all Senator Obama’s campaign artifacts?
A: I was most impressed by one artifact: the signs that turn each campaign state into a logo for the Obama campaign. I’ve never seen anything quite like that before. I think it’s clever. But it also works as it makes each state feel part of a larger, national movement.
Typefaces, from top to bottom: Comic Sans, Times Roman, Gotham.
Q: Do you think the typographical style actually makes a difference?
A: You bet I do. Style equals accuracy. Put the word “change” in Comic Sans and the idea feels lightweight and silly. Place it in Times Roman and it feels self-important. In Gotham, it feels just right. Inspiring, not threatening. In the end, typography makes a real difference when it delivers words and ideas that are relevant to people. And for many, that seems to be the case here.
16/04/2008
Subscrever:
Enviar feedback (Atom)
1 comentário:
Hello. This post is likeable, and your blog is very interesting, congratulations :-). I will add in my blogroll =). If ossible gives a last there on my blog, it is about the Aparelho de DVD, I hope you enjoy. The address is http://aparelho-dvd.blogspot.com. A hug.
Enviar um comentário