Re: Fwd: Visual Identity / Design Rationale

podesta-emails 2,382 words email

P17 P22 V11 P19 V16

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- mQQBBGBjDtIBH6DJa80zDBgR+VqlYGaXu5bEJg9HEgAtJeCLuThdhXfl5Zs32RyB I1QjIlttvngepHQozmglBDmi2FZ4S+wWhZv10bZCoyXPIPwwq6TylwPv8+buxuff B6tYil3VAB9XKGPyPjKrlXn1fz76VMpuTOs7OGYR8xDidw9EHfBvmb+sQyrU1FOW aPHxba5lK6hAo/KYFpTnimsmsz0Cvo1sZAV/EFIkfagiGTL2J/NhINfGPScpj8LB bYelVN/NU4c6Ws1ivWbfcGvqU4lymoJgJo/l9HiV6X2bdVyuB24O3xeyhTnD7laf epykwxODVfAt4qLC3J478MSSmTXS8zMumaQMNR1tUUYtHCJC0xAKbsFukzbfoRDv m2zFCCVxeYHvByxstuzg0SurlPyuiFiy2cENek5+W8Sjt95nEiQ4suBldswpz1Kv n71t7vd7zst49xxExB+tD+vmY7GXIds43Rb05dqksQuo2yCeuCbY5RBiMHX3d4nU 041jHBsv5wY24j0N6bpAsm/s0T0Mt7IO6UaN33I712oPlclTweYTAesW3jDpeQ7A ioi0CMjWZnRpUxorcFmzL/Cc/fPqgAtnAL5GIUuEOqUf8AlKmzsKcnKZ7L2d8mxG QqN16nlAiUuUpchQNMr+tAa1L5S1uK/fu6thVlSSk7KMQyJfVpwLy6068a1WmNj4 yxo9HaSeQNXh3cui+61qb9wlrkwlaiouw9+bpCmR0V8+XpWma/D/TEz9tg5vkfNo eG4t+FUQ7QgrrvIkDNFcRyTUO9cJHB+kcp2NgCcpCwan3wnuzKka9AWFAitpoAwx L6BX0L8kg/LzRPhkQnMOrj/tuu9hZrui4woqURhWLiYi2aZe7WCkuoqR/qMGP6qP EQRcvndTWkQo6K9BdCH4ZjRqcGbY1wFt/qgAxhi+uSo2IWiM1fRI4eRCGifpBtYK Dw44W9uPAu4cgVnAUzESEeW0bft5XXxAqpvyMBIdv3YqfVfOElZdKbteEu4YuOao FLpbk4ajCxO4Fzc9AugJ8iQOAoaekJWA7TjWJ6CbJe8w3thpznP0w6jNG8ZleZ6a jHckyGlx5wzQTRLVT5+wK6edFlxKmSd93jkLWWCbrc0Dsa39OkSTDmZPoZgKGRhp Yc0C4jePYreTGI6p7/H3AFv84o0fjHt5fn4GpT1Xgfg+1X/wmIv7iNQtljCjAqhD 6XN+QiOAYAloAym8lOm9zOoCDv1TSDpmeyeP0rNV95OozsmFAUaKSUcUFBUfq9FL uyr+rJZQw2DPfq2wE75PtOyJiZH7zljCh12fp5yrNx6L7HSqwwuG7vGO4f0ltYOZ dPKzaEhCOO7o108RexdNABEBAAG0Rldpa2lMZWFrcyBFZGl0b3JpYWwgT2ZmaWNl IEhpZ2ggU2VjdXJpdHkgQ29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBLZXkgKDIwMjEtMjAyNCmJBDEE EwEKACcFAmBjDtICGwMFCQWjmoAFCwkIBwMFFQoJCAsFFgIDAQACHgECF4AACgkQ nG3NFyg+RUzRbh+eMSKgMYOdoz70u4RKTvev4KyqCAlwji+1RomnW7qsAK+l1s6b ugOhOs8zYv2ZSy6lv5JgWITRZogvB69JP94+Juphol6LIImC9X3P/bcBLw7VCdNA mP0XQ4OlleLZWXUEW9EqR4QyM0RkPMoxXObfRgtGHKIkjZYXyGhUOd7MxRM8DBzN yieFf3CjZNADQnNBk/ZWRdJrpq8J1W0dNKI7IUW2yCyfdgnPAkX/lyIqw4ht5UxF VGrva3PoepPir0TeKP3M0BMxpsxYSVOdwcsnkMzMlQ7TOJlsEdtKQwxjV6a1vH+t k4TpR4aG8fS7ZtGzxcxPylhndiiRVwdYitr5nKeBP69aWH9uLcpIzplXm4DcusUc Bo8KHz+qlIjs03k8hRfqYhUGB96nK6TJ0xS7tN83WUFQXk29fWkXjQSp1Z5dNCcT sWQBTxWxwYyEI8iGErH2xnok3HTyMItdCGEVBBhGOs1uCHX3W3yW2CooWLC/8Pia qgss3V7m4SHSfl4pDeZJcAPiH3Fm00wlGUslVSziatXW3499f2QdSyNDw6Qc+chK hUFflmAaavtpTqXPk+Lzvtw5SSW+iRGmEQICKzD2chpy05mW5v6QUy+G29nchGDD rrfpId2Gy1VoyBx8FAto4+6BOWVijrOj9Boz7098huotDQgNoEnidvVdsqP+P1RR QJekr97idAV28i7iEOLd99d6qI5xRqc3/QsV+y2ZnnyKB10uQNVPLgUkQljqN0wP XmdVer+0X+aeTHUd1d64fcc6M0cpYefNNRCsTsgbnWD+x0rjS9RMo+Uosy41+IxJ 6qIBhNrMK6fEmQoZG3qTRPYYrDoaJdDJERN2E5yLxP2SPI0rWNjMSoPEA/gk5L91 m6bToM/0VkEJNJkpxU5fq5834s3PleW39ZdpI0HpBDGeEypo/t9oGDY3Pd7JrMOF zOTohxTyu4w2Ql7jgs+7KbO9PH0Fx5dTDmDq66jKIkkC7DI0QtMQclnmWWtn14BS KTSZoZekWESVYhORwmPEf32EPiC9t8zDRglXzPGmJAPISSQz+Cc9o1ipoSIkoCCh 2MWoSbn3KFA53vgsYd0vS/+Nw5aUksSleorFns2yFgp/w5Ygv0D007k6u3DqyRLB W5y6tJLvbC1ME7jCBoLW6nFEVxgDo727pqOpMVjGGx5zcEokPIRDMkW/lXjw+fTy c6misESDCAWbgzniG/iyt77Kz711unpOhw5aemI9LpOq17AiIbjzSZYt6b1Aq7Wr aB+C1yws2ivIl9ZYK911A1m69yuUg0DPK+uyL7Z86XC7hI8B0IY1MM/MbmFiDo6H dkfwUckE74sxxeJrFZKkBbkEAQRgYw7SAR+gvktRnaUrj/84Pu0oYVe49nPEcy/7 5Fs6LvAwAj+JcAQPW3uy7D7fuGFEQguasfRrhWY5R87+g5ria6qQT2/Sf19Tpngs d0Dd9DJ1MMTaA1pc5F7PQgoOVKo68fDXfjr76n1NchfCzQbozS1HoM8ys3WnKAw+ Neae9oymp2t9FB3B+To4nsvsOM9KM06ZfBILO9NtzbWhzaAyWwSrMOFFJfpyxZAQ 8VbucNDHkPJjhxuafreC9q2f316RlwdS+XjDggRY6xD77fHtzYea04UWuZidc5zL VpsuZR1nObXOgE+4s8LU5p6fo7jL0CRxvfFnDhSQg2Z617flsdjYAJ2JR4apg3Es G46xWl8xf7t227/0nXaCIMJI7g09FeOOsfCmBaf/ebfiXXnQbK2zCbbDYXbrYgw6 ESkSTt940lHtynnVmQBvZqSXY93MeKjSaQk1VKyobngqaDAIIzHxNCR941McGD7F qHHM2YMTgi6XXaDThNC6u5msI1l/24PPvrxkJxjPSGsNlCbXL2wqaDgrP6LvCP9O uooR9dVRxaZXcKQjeVGxrcRtoTSSyZimfjEercwi9RKHt42O5akPsXaOzeVjmvD9 EB5jrKBe/aAOHgHJEIgJhUNARJ9+dXm7GofpvtN/5RE6qlx11QGvoENHIgawGjGX Jy5oyRBS+e+KHcgVqbmV9bvIXdwiC4BDGxkXtjc75hTaGhnDpu69+Cq016cfsh+0 XaRnHRdh0SZfcYdEqqjn9CTILfNuiEpZm6hYOlrfgYQe1I13rgrnSV+EfVCOLF4L P9ejcf3eCvNhIhEjsBNEUDOFAA6J5+YqZvFYtjk3efpM2jCg6XTLZWaI8kCuADMu yrQxGrM8yIGvBndrlmmljUqlc8/Nq9rcLVFDsVqb9wOZjrCIJ7GEUD6bRuolmRPE SLrpP5mDS+wetdhLn5ME1e9JeVkiSVSFIGsumZTNUaT0a90L4yNj5gBE40dvFplW 7TLeNE/ewDQk5LiIrfWuTUn3CqpjIOXxsZFLjieNgofX1nSeLjy3tnJwuTYQlVJO 3CbqH1k6cOIvE9XShnnuxmiSoav4uZIXnLZFQRT9v8UPIuedp7TO8Vjl0xRTajCL PdTk21e7fYriax62IssYcsbbo5G5auEdPO04H/+v/hxmRsGIr3XYvSi4ZWXKASxy a/jHFu9zEqmy0EBzFzpmSx+FrzpMKPkoU7RbxzMgZwIYEBk66Hh6gxllL0JmWjV0 iqmJMtOERE4NgYgumQT3dTxKuFtywmFxBTe80BhGlfUbjBtiSrULq59np4ztwlRT wDEAVDoZbN57aEXhQ8jjF2RlHtqGXhFMrg9fALHaRQARAQABiQQZBBgBCgAPBQJg Yw7SAhsMBQkFo5qAAAoJEJxtzRcoPkVMdigfoK4oBYoxVoWUBCUekCg/alVGyEHa ekvFmd3LYSKX/WklAY7cAgL/1UlLIFXbq9jpGXJUmLZBkzXkOylF9FIXNNTFAmBM 3TRjfPv91D8EhrHJW0SlECN+riBLtfIQV9Y1BUlQthxFPtB1G1fGrv4XR9Y4TsRj VSo78cNMQY6/89Kc00ip7tdLeFUHtKcJs+5EfDQgagf8pSfF/TWnYZOMN2mAPRRf fh3SkFXeuM7PU/X0B6FJNXefGJbmfJBOXFbaSRnkacTOE9caftRKN1LHBAr8/RPk pc9p6y9RBc/+6rLuLRZpn2W3m3kwzb4scDtHHFXXQBNC1ytrqdwxU7kcaJEPOFfC XIdKfXw9AQll620qPFmVIPH5qfoZzjk4iTH06Yiq7PI4OgDis6bZKHKyyzFisOkh DXiTuuDnzgcu0U4gzL+bkxJ2QRdiyZdKJJMswbm5JDpX6PLsrzPmN314lKIHQx3t NNXkbfHL/PxuoUtWLKg7/I3PNnOgNnDqCgqpHJuhU1AZeIkvewHsYu+urT67tnpJ AK1Z4CgRxpgbYA4YEV1rWVAPHX1u1okcg85rc5FHK8zh46zQY1wzUTWubAcxqp9K 1IqjXDDkMgIX2Z2fOA1plJSwugUCbFjn4sbT0t0YuiEFMPMB42ZCjcCyA1yysfAd DYAmSer1bq47tyTFQwP+2ZnvW/9p3yJ4oYWzwMzadR3T0K4sgXRC2Us9nPL9k2K5 TRwZ07wE2CyMpUv+hZ4ja13A/1ynJZDZGKys+pmBNrO6abxTGohM8LIWjS+YBPIq trxh8jxzgLazKvMGmaA6KaOGwS8vhfPfxZsu2TJaRPrZMa/HpZ2aEHwxXRy4nm9G Kx1eFNJO6Ues5T7KlRtl8gflI5wZCCD/4T5rto3SfG0s0jr3iAVb3NCn9Q73kiph PSwHuRxcm+hWNszjJg3/W+Fr8fdXAh5i0JzMNscuFAQNHgfhLigenq+BpCnZzXya 01kqX24AdoSIbH++vvgE0Bjj6mzuRrH5VJ1Qg9nQ+yMjBWZADljtp3CARUbNkiIg tUJ8IJHCGVwXZBqY4qeJc3h/RiwWM2UIFfBZ+E06QPznmVLSkwvvop3zkr4eYNez cIKUju8vRdW6sxaaxC/GECDlP0Wo6lH0uChpE3NJ1daoXIeymajmYxNt+drz7+pd jMqjDtNA2rgUrjptUgJK8ZLdOQ4WCrPY5pP9ZXAO7+mK7S3u9CTywSJmQpypd8hv 8Bu8jKZdoxOJXxj8CphK951eNOLYxTOxBUNB8J2lgKbmLIyPvBvbS1l1lCM5oHlw WXGlp70pspj3kaX4mOiFaWMKHhOLb+er8yh8jspM184= =5a6T -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- You and Jim want to come to town for dinner tonight? Trying out a new pasta machine. On Feb 15, 2015 9:13 AM, "Jennifer Palmieri" <[email protected]> wrote: > This diatribe make me like her. > > Sent from my iPad > > Begin forwarded message: > > *From:* Wendy Clark <[email protected]> > *Date:* February 14, 2015 at 11:53:52 PM EST > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* *Fwd: Visual Identity / Design Rationale* > > Jen, > > I apologize for inadvertently missing you from the distribution below. > > Not that your valentines night was missing a branding diatribe. Ha. > > Speak tomorrow. Wendy > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > *Subject: **Visual Identity / Design Rationale* > *From: *Wendy Clark <[email protected]> > *Date: *February 14, 2015 at 9:10:21 PM EST > *Cc: *Robby Mook <[email protected]>, Teddy Goff < > [email protected]>, John Anzalone <[email protected]>, Jeff Liszt < > [email protected]>, Jim Margolis <[email protected]>, Mandy > Grunwald <[email protected]>, [email protected], David Binder < > [email protected]> > *To: *Joel Benenson <[email protected]> > > Joel, > > Thanks for taking time to outline your thoughts. > I have read them carefully and want to answer your questions and try to > address some of your concerns. > The makes for a long email, but I believe we’re at that point. > I’ve also added the rest of the team in here as our exchange may be > helpful for everyone. > > As we outlined on Friday’s team call, Teddy and I met with Pentagram on > Friday right before the 9am call and confirmed 3 streams of work that they > have been looking at for the last 24-36 hours. > > They are: > > 1. Hillary. — we need to determine if there is a similar technique that > addresses the inevitability that comes with the period. What everyone > lights to is the design asset that the period provides and can be applied > to other words with and without Hillary. However what does not work is the > implied emphasis of a period itself. There is no debate on what the core > mark would be on this route if there’s another option for the period. > > 2. H Window — while there’s lots of positive reaction for this direction > there’s also more to do in terms of getting the team and the Secretary > comfortable to go on this. In her feedback on our call her language of > “embracing people, embracing our problems and embracing our future” was > really helpful along with “reaching outwards to inspire upwards." How do > we imbue this approach with an even stronger sense of her passion and > motivation behind doing the job? She leans away from Hillary type or > Hillary signature, she’s unwilling for this to be so focused on her. While > we will maintain this as something to consider, per Mandy and Jim’s input > on the Friday call, we are seeking other solutions. So the core mark has to > work harder to her mission and/or attributes. The other thing we need to > add to this is the contextual relevance of a tagline and/or words as was > displayed on the Hillary. approach. That combination of words and design > consistency really compels everyone. How would we introduce words and/or a > tagline within the design route of the H Window? > > 3. Something else — the ideas that have been surfaced on H+You, &, + sign, > Together, Us, the President’s # idea and the Secretary’s language outlined > above need to be explored outside the constraints of the two existing > directions. I think the watch out here is to not get too clever or too > cutesy with symbols. > > You will see options within all three routes on our call tomorrow. > > On the design brief, we’ve been working against the version we all emailed > and socialized 3 weeks ago and a distillation of the core idea and > qualities/attributes was finalized on a call you, Mandy and I had. > I recognize there’s new insight since then, if there are core attributes > that the design should represent beyond the current brief that would be > important to agree on. In the meeting last week the Secretary seemed to > associate with what we had identified: fresh yet familiar, tenacity, > resilience, empathy, creativity, action-oriented, future focused. > > As to the Obama parallel, we’ve discussed in the presentations that > Obama’s campaign execution truly represented a turning point for political > branding in presidential campaigns — they in fact used what many would say > were widely accepted brand techniques that companies outside politics > historically use — contemporary colors and iconography, dynamic composition > in the mark, the mark to represent truths of the brand, etc. We all > observed in the political campaigns before Obama it was largely typesetting > with use of flag imagery, stars and photograph identity as the core design > assets used. > > And this use of branding has a lot to do with why I believe I’m here. > And why Pentagram and Michael Beirut are here. > > As you point out on Michael’s quote below, the Obama visual identity > changed how the design and branding community considered political brands. > > This benchmark sets the stage for a much more branded execution for > Secretary Clinton, and quite frankly a fairly high expectation of a branded > execution. > But at its core, great branding must always reflect the unassailable > truths of the brand. > And the best, most compelling brands in the world are singular and > relentless in their quest to do just this. > > We have a gift in the Hillary Rodham Clinton brand because of massive > recognition/awareness. Obama did not start with this. > At the same time we must create a new, fresh view of that familiar brand > in a truly authentic and compelling way. > > To be clear, a logo can communicate and aid attribution of qualities, but > it is not a proxy for the messaging of the campaign until they are > relentlessly connected and delivered, repeatedly and consistently. > That’s when brands take on meaning. > > As Michael has used previously, no one would look at a red Target logo and > think: design for all — fashionable yet affordable choices for my home and > family — expect more, pay less. But their relentless, contemporary, > fashion-forward products and aligned messaging has imbued that logo with > meaning just that. > > Similarly, Apple, the world’s most valuable brand, launched with their > rainbow apple mark in 1976. It simply stood for creativity, thinking > differently. Their repeated, consistent use of the mark along with some of > the world’s most creative advertising has imbued that bitten apple logo > with meaning but no one would look at that mark standalone and say it means > Apple is the leader in human-centered designed, electronic devices with a > vision for the future. > > And non-corporate examples are similarly rich in learnings. The Human > Rights Campaign simply uses the equality sign. It’s compelling, simple and > speaks to their core — being a relentless champion of equal rights for > humanity. There are plenty of other attributes that are associated with > HRC, but equality is their unassailable brand truth. > > So, here’s the point. We want to create a visual representation for > Secretary Clinton that is equally as compelling, interesting, exciting and > inviting as Obama’s mark was eight years ago. And to use techniques that > some of the best brands have done and continue to do around the world. And > again, the mark is simply one aspect of a bevy of connection points > (messaging, speeches, PR, advertising, web, etc.) > > And this leads me to explain, if I’ve failed to so far, why the H window > approach is so compelling to us. > > This approach will represent in 2015 what the Obama approach represented > in 2007. > It literally resets the benchmark for political branding, if not all > branding. > It is of and for the times leveraging the massive and important shift to > customization, personalization and co-creation. > And, more importantly, while meeting this marketplace shift the mark is, > at the same time, anchored on the unassailable truth of Secretary Clinton’s > life and career — being in service of others. It’s not about her, it’s > about you. It also meets our brief of fresh yet familiar, it shows > creativity and empathy. > > Now, we have work to do. > While this direction is immediately compelling and will fuel advocacy from > her fans and drive conversation and content around and for the campaign, we > have yet to effectively land its core manifestation. > And while we’re likely to use it in numerous variations and iterations as > it is so flexible to do, we have to have an anchoring point. > And in honesty we’ve struggled to land that core mark to everyone’s > confidence and liking. > > We’ll share some more iterations tomorrow. > One in particular introduces another attribute — future-focus — and a > design asset like the period from option 1 that is interesting. > > But for this conversation, I don’t want our relentless efforts to make the > core mark work construed as being obstinate. > It’s simply that we believe this approach would be level-setting for the > candidate and campaign and are determined to land the core mark so we can > reap the benefits of this approach. > > Some final assurance, you will also see completely new exploration to get > a sense of other approaches tomorrow and Michael/Pentagram has added two > other senior partners into their effort to engage in the work, the > limitation until now was set by us for confidentiality purposes. > > If you’ve read this far, I appreciate the chance to frame the opportunity, > underscore our continued confidence and provide any clarity. > > A revised deck will be coming shortly. > > Thanks. Wendy > > > > On Feb 14, 2015, at 12:33 PM, Joel Benenson <[email protected]> wrote: > > All, > I have a nagging concern that was reinforced at the meeting on Wednesday > and while it’s not keeping me up at night I just want to share it with the > three of you to address however you see fit. > > From the time the broader group was brought into the meeting at Pentagram > there has been a concern about the static nature of the mark, the lack of > action or anything suggesting forward movement etc. Each time we were told > there would some exploration in a new direction. We have had several calls > along the way and the meeting this week where we thought we would see > something in a new direction and we really haven’t. To me, a new direction > means a new concept something different from the idea of the “window,” > which is one concept but we really haven’t been shown anything else. > > I don’t think it’s fair to compare things repeatedly to the Obama mark but > I think the process – or at least what’s been written and said about its > development, might be worth looking at again. The “O” because linked to an > identify that was not only positive and suggestive, it was also reflective > who Obama was and what he represented. There was a rising sun, a path or > road both of which suggest movement. Apart from the design issues have > raised, conceptually a window is two dimensional object and the core > quality Pentagram is affixing to it (transparent, open) only get us to the > use cases as Teddy says and not to the core qualities about H that we are > trying drive and communicate. > > I would also like to press Michael to match what he said himself about > Obama’s mark/brand. > > Designer Michael Bierut <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Bierut> called > Obama's branding "just as good or better" as the best commercial brand > designs. "Every time you look, all those signs are perfect," Beirut said. > "Graphic designers like me don't understand how it's happening. It's > unprecedented and inconceivable to us. The people in the know are > flabbergasted." > > At this point, I tihnk it would be wise to do one or both of the following: > > · Review the brief to assess whether we are or not asking them to > execute against the right things (we now have research getting us closer to > our core rationale, attributes etc.) > · Ask Pentagram to develop something, perhaps with a different > team, that is truly different from the territory we have already seen and > possibly get 1 or 2 small firms to take a crack at this so we generate > some healthy competition. > > This is not a knock on Michael or Pentagram, who are terrific in the world > of corporate branding. But I think we’re looking for something in the mark > can present the discipline of a corporate brand while creating the truly > dynamic potential we want in a political mark. > > Thanks, > > Joel > > > >