My third source I found is an article from The Denver Egotist, and I thought it was very useful because of the charts and statistics it outlines in it. I came across this article when searching for the earlier steps in the process, such as different logos they were testing, and how they finally decided on the one they are using. I found out that this project was actually initially launched over a year ago, so many tests and surveys have been undergone in this time. This article also shows the three different colors they were deciding upon of the final logo, which is green. The other two variations were grey and black, and seemed very plain for our state. Something very interesting that is noted in this article is that rather than hiring outside sources to design a logo for something they knew little about, they reached out to our own residents for help with this project. This also means that not only does this brand supposedly represent Colorado, but it was built by Coloradans which makes it somewhat more genuine. With all the good hype it doesn't fail to mention the 1.1 million already spent, and the other half of a million tax dollars expected to be put towards the project this year.
"Colorado Unveils Official State Brand and Slogan." RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Nov. 2013.
My fourth source is another article from the Denver Post written in October explaining how the new symbol is not meant to interfere with the wildly successful "come to life" campaign that boosts in tourism to Colorado. This already existing campaign made 2012 one of Colorado's best years for tourism, and studies found it even had a return of 17 dollars to every 1 tax dollar that was put in. This is good for our state, and for many they believe that this new logo and slogan, "it’s in our nature", may interfere and clash with that. The leader of the branding Colorado campaign has been traveling around doing conferences and he assures that this is not going to happen, and that they recognize the success of the previous plan, and has adapted that to fit with theirs. Although some saw his vision and understood what he was saying, there are still many skeptics that need to be convinced.
"Tourism Experts Worried Colorado Branding Effort Might Derail Campaign." - The Denver Post. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Nov. 2013.
The fifth and final source I am drawing information from is an article that outlines how students are actually helping to create the Colorado brand. They are all from different counties, 64 students in all, and they were asked to create blogs about their county, and describe in one word each day why it’s so great and unique. When Hickenlooper unveiled his blueprint for Colorado he also released these, as a look deeper into our state. Something notable was these were all high school students, doing this by choice, after they were picked from some by the governor and his board. Many of these blogs included photographs and such that showed what Colorado had to offer, and often hearing it from the youth can make you believe in something. Another great part of this strategy is high school kids know social media best, and that is where they were asked to reach about their personal experiences and counties, and the Colorado brand. This also helps reach other young people, and is important as they are the future of our state. An interactive plan to help spread the brand seems to be effective as though not all talk is positive; there is a lot of people talking about it. Reaching out to different areas of the state also helps to make sure that no one is left out, and so I think this is one of the better parts of the Colorado brand so far.
"Students Part of State Re-branding." Our Colorado News. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Nov. 2013
I do not know anything about a logo or symbol for states, but it makes sense. We have to get people to visit and spend their money somehow. When I started reading my first question was, why would we spend so much money on something that seems so simple? As I kept reading you did mention in your next resource how much money was brought back compared to what was spent. I suggest that be a part of your argument. It helps put it in to perspective, why so much money would be spent. It also makes me wonder what other sides to this there are. Are there people that feel it is a waste of time or that there would be a way to spend less money on it? It may also be helpful to include the main ideas behind why they are making a new slogan when the one we have already works. For something that seems like it should be so simple at first, the more you think about it, the more there needs to go into something like this because of how much it can truly mean.
ReplyDeleteI do like these sources. They do have very helpful information that makes a person understand why this is being done, and how beneficial it can be to our state in the long run. I like that you have found that many non-government people were included in the logo and branding. It is more beneficial for the State to have a view from many different perspectives of how we are viewed, to make sure the logo is an accurate and well received reflection of us. I am curious what all the arguments against it are, other than it being boring and plain looking. Good luck on the final essay!
ReplyDelete