What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective: Best Practices and a Semiotic
Analysis of the Logos of Barack Obama, George W. Bush and John McCain
By: Carissa Mirasol Nee
A Capstone Project
Presented to The Faculty of the School of Communication
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
For the Degree of Masters of Arts in Public Communication
Supervisor: Professor Lauren Feldman, Ph.D.
April 21, 2011
2
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
3
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT
4
INTRODUCTION
5
BACKGROUND
9
THE LOGO AS A VISUALIZATION TOOL
DEFINING A LOGO VS. A BRAND
9
9
LITERATURE REVIEW
10
DEFINING THE ROLE OF THE TARGET AUDIENCE: THE VOTING PUBLIC
EFFECTIVE LOGO DESIGN PRINCIPLES
BEST PRACTICE #1: CREATE OR SELECT A MODERATELY ELABORATE LOGO
BEST PRACTICE #2: CREATE A LOGO WITH A “NATURAL IMAGE”
BEST PRACTICE #3: CREATE A LOGO WITH A HIGH LEVEL OF FAMILIAR MEANING
EMOTION IN LOGO INTERPRETATION
THEORETICAL APPLICATION: COLOR THEORY
THEORETICAL APPLICATION: APPRAISAL THEORY
THEORETICAL APPLICATION: AFFECTIVE INTELLIGENCE
LITERATURE REVIEW SUMMARY
10
14
15
18
19
20
22
24
25
26
CASE PROFILE
28
CHOICE OF LOGOS
SEMIOTIC ANALYSIS
DENOTATIVE VERSUS CONNOTATIVE RELATIONSHIPS
28
29
30
CASE ANALYSES AND DISCUSSION
35
DENOTATIONAL INVENTORY
HIGHER LEVELS OF SIGNIFICATION (CONNOTATIVE INVENTORY)
ELEMENT #1: TEXT
ELEMENT #2: INCLUSION OF A URL
ELEMENT #3: THE LOGO IMAGE
OBAMA/BIDEN LOGO IMAGE
BUSH/CHENEY LOGO IMAGE
MCCAIN/PALIN LOGO IMAGE
35
35
36
39
40
40
44
47
CONCLUSION
52
REFERENCES
54
APPENDIX
58
APPENDIX A: DENOTATIONAL INVENTORY
APPENDIX B: CONNOTATIVE INVENTORY OF THE OBAMA/BIDEN LOGO
APPENDIX C: CONNOTATIVE INVENTORY OF THE BUSH/CHENEY LOGO
APPENDIX D: CONNOTATIVE INVENTORY OF THE MCCAIN/PALIN LOGO
58
59
60
61
4
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
ABSTRACT
Obama’s 2008 election campaign marketing team seized an opportunity to do something
not previously done by past presidential candidates — they made Obama a brand and created a
strong logo as the face of that brand. As a result of this strategy, the marketing team became the
recipient of Advertising Age’s “2008 Marketer of the Year” award. The U.S. 2008 presidential
election demonstrated how visual communications could play a pivotal role in the promotion of a
candidate and development of an effective campaign strategy.
The capstone’s literature review summarizes extensive research and extracts what visual
elements and strategies contribute to a well-designed logo. Although a logo design can be
aesthetically pleasing and offers a certain appeal, it may not necessarily communicate the right or
intended message about a presidential candidate in an effective manner. This capstone provides
a framework of best practices in logo design and how they can be applied in creating political
campaign logos that could positively impact the outcome of an election. From the results of the
semiotic analysis of three political campaign logos: Obama, George W. Bush and John McCain,
this capstone offers a clearer understanding of the process on how the public or target audience
derives meaning from or interprets a logo image. The results shed insight into the possible
meanings and interpretations of each logo and can serve as basis in evaluating their
effectiveness.
5
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
INTRODUCTION
Written and oral communications are important tools in conveying thoughts, ideas and feelings
to a target audience. Along with these, however, is the power of visual communication to
strengthen and go beyond what one reads and hears. Just like literacy of the written and spoken
language, the visual component of communication serves as a mode of discourse and is an
instrument that provides clarity through the use of tangible elements. Visual design and imagery
are often equated with art, decoration and creative presentation as well as entertainment;
however, its place in the realm of effective public communication cannot afford to be
overlooked. A visual image not only fortifies what the audience reads and hears, but also
titillates and delights them. It is a persuasive vehicle that can make educating or creating an
experience easier as the audience absorbs the visual information presented to them, thus resulting
in prompt action and positive response to the message being conveyed. Therefore, it is important
to select an appropriate visual image that can be combined and intricately woven with written
and spoken words to form a “unified communication unit” effectively enhancing and refining the
message(s) being conveyed (Horn, 1999).
Past research in the realm of design and visual communications has indicated that there is
a significant need to focus on the role of logos in branding and marketing campaigns. Today’s
society is extremely visually oriented and they use logos as a “recognition aid, speeding selection
of the preferred product” (Henderson & Cote, 1998, p.14). This consumerist nature of the public
when selecting “preferred” products indeed translates to how citizens can operate as “political
consumers.” In Dion Dennis’ (2002) Inventing W, The Presidential Brand: The Rise of QVC
Politics, he makes this point by taking the following statement and substituting the word
6
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
‘politicians’ where the word ‘companies’ is used and ‘citizens’ where the word ‘consumer’ is
used:
“Today’s society is undeniably brand conscious. We’re attracted to brands that
project messages we like… Forward thinking companies [politicians]
understand that if their brand carries a message, it carries equity. Companies
[politicians] now are using that equity to deepen relationships with customers
[citizens] by offering supporting products that reflect the personality of the
brand. It’s called relationship marketing and it works”
(Dennis, 2000, as cited in Hockett, 2005, p. 91).
Furthermore, Johnson-Cartee and Copeland (1991) stated that voters no longer experience
politics first-hand. Elements and pieces of knowledge are given to political consumers through
the mass media system. Mass media has created symbols for the public to interpret on their own.
Through these symbols, the voting public simplifies the political realities they should experience,
e.g., the differences between Candidate X and Candidate Y, Democrats and Republicans, etc.
(Johnson-Cartee & Copeland, 1991). Logos help create these simplified political realities and
enable the public to view the vast political landscape as knowable, understandable and easy to
navigate through.
The U.S. 2008 presidential campaign demonstrated how visual communications play a
pivotal role in promoting and developing an effective campaign strategy. The 2008 presidential
election was an election of many firsts. Not only did the nation elect its first African-American
president but it was also the first time that a relatively unknown candidate was catapulted to the
front line for nomination by his party and unexpectedly bested the other candidate. In a time
when Americans were frustrated with issues that plagued the Bush administration—the war in
Iraq, the banking and mortgage crisis, the rising cost of health care and energy, and
unemployment— Obama’s overall campaign message communicated themes of “change” and “a
mandate for change” (Organizing for America, 2010). Obama’s marketing team seized the
opportunity to enhance that focus not just in words and eloquent delivery of speeches and
7
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
messages by the candidate, but also by crafting a visual design concept that fit and was
consistent with the theme of his campaign, all of which effectively helped in presenting him as a
solid leader.
It is interesting to note how the success of the Obama campaign triggered among many
communication practitioners, graphic designers and political campaign strategists a renewed and
revitalized emphasis on the need for a comprehensive logo design that could serve as a
cornerstone of a candidate’s “brand.” The Obama logo was featured consistently on all of the
websites, signage, and marketing materials. Moreover, from a design standpoint, the Obama
campaign logo was a complete and total departure from the stylistic norms of other presidential
campaign logos, yet was one that resonated with millions of Americans (Heller, 2008). It would
behoove campaign strategists and supporters to leverage party resources toward the development
of a logo for a political candidate in future elections.
This capstone focused specifically on the use of candidate logos as a political campaign
tool. Understanding what has made other presidential campaign logos successful can equip
designers with knowledge of what to incorporate and consider in future logo designs.
The capstone begins by clearly delineating a logo versus a brand, explaining the purpose
of logos and why they are integral in political campaigns. Next, the literature review looks at the
role of the target audience (voters) when they view a logo/visual image. This section delineates
different voter types and how each voter type would process visual information as it relate to
logos. The literature review also examines several communication theories of emotion,
information processing, appraisal and affective intelligence. Knowledge of the existing
theoretical and empirical applications of communication and visual design concepts will be
useful for communications practitioners and designers in the creation, development and/or
8
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
selection of productive visual elements that would supplement, if not dominate, a political
campaign.
The sheer success of the 2008 Obama logo invites a systematic analysis of how a logo
can be successfully used by a political candidate to convey key themes of his or her campaign,
contribute to a candidate’s positive image and serve as a face of what the candidate represents.
While for years, presidential candidates have employed political logos to supplement their
campaign, it has only been in recent years that the use of campaign logos has garnered much
attention from the general public. To accommodate this recent interest, this capstone conducts a
semiotic analysis of three of the more recent presidential logos: Barack Obama’s “O”, George
W. Bush’s “W”, and John McCain’s “Naval Star” (Figure 1).
Figure 1: Barack Obama’s “O”, George W. Bush “W” and John McCain’s “Naval Star” (Source: 4.president.org).
This semiotic analysis is important because it explores the various factors that render the
meaning of a political logo effective. The analysis highlights the importance and degree of
influence that these political logos had on the public. Discussing the strengths and weaknesses
of each logo will ostensibly equip campaign strategists, designers and party affiliates with a
foundational knowledge and a set of best practices on what characteristics to consider and
incorporate when creating a logo for future presidential candidates and their campaigns.
9
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
BACKGROUND: THE LOGO AS A VISUAL COMMUNICATION TOOL
Defining a Logo vs. a Brand
“Politics is a symbolic world” (Johnson-Cartee, 1991, p. 1). In the realm of politics,
symbols and logos are widely used to represent political figures, ideologies and social issues
(Young, 2009). For example, the donkey and elephant logos are symbols of the Democratic and
Republican parties, respectively. To the American public, the “donkey” and the “elephant” serve
as powerful reminders and are visual shorthand for all of the political ideologies that each of
these parties represent. In essence, these animals are the visual representation of the Democratic
and Republican “brands.”
It is important to clarify and delineate between the terms “logo” and “brand”. While they
are many times used interchangeably, “logos” and “brands” differ in their form and function
even if they work in tandem to serve an important purpose in visual communications. A “brand”
is a visual tool that serves as a company’s/organization’s perceived image and reputation. It is
an emotional tie that visually exudes the intangible characteristics of an organization’s
overarching goals, beliefs, promises and purpose, making a connection with its audience
members (Pittard, Ewing & Jevons, 2007). Therefore, a brand is integral to instilling a positive
image of the organization and the product/service they produce.
Being that a brand is a type of visual tool, a “logo” functions as the “face” of a brand
(Rand, 1991). Paul Rand (1991) further defines a logo as a “flag, a signature, an escutcheon”
and is an identifier that “derives its meaning from the quality of the thing it symbolizes, not the
other way around.” For all intents and purposes, a logo provides viewers with instant
recognition of an organization. It directly influences the viewers’ impression of that
organization’s product or the service it provides (Gernsheimer, 2008).
10
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
LITERATURE REVIEW
Defining the Role of the Target Audience: The Voting Public
In today’s partisan society, the dissemination of a candidate’s ideologies and political
stance is a complex and challenging task. For any presidential candidate, the overarching goal is
to persuade voters to vote for him/her and get elected. In order to achieve that goal, the
candidate must display mass appeal – ostensibly be everything to everyone and properly
communicate his/her ideals to the voting public. The development of a candidate’s image is
critical during an election campaign period, for their projected image, which must be perceived
as positive and all-embracing if not the ultimate “candidate,” is a large, determining factor of
success. Previous research claims that the public’s voting intentions are commonly focused on
the projected image of a candidate instead of a candidate’s policy concerns (Guzman, 2009). In
such instances, utilizing a visual design system such as a logo to communicate a candidate’s
political ideals, character and integrity is a practice that warrants further study and insight. As a
whole, the general public is very aware of visual symbols—most especially, an organization’s
logo. As graphic designer Paul Rand said, “If in the business of communications, ‘image is
king,’ the essence of this image, the logo, is a jewel in its crown” (Rand, 1991 as cited in
Gernsheimer, 2008, p. 1).
Existing theoretical literature on visual communication provides a high level view of its
function and highlights its importance when considering a logo design in a political campaign.
In visual communication, the role of the audience is central since the purpose of an image is to
influence and persuade the audience about a belief of the past, present or future through the
presentation of a two-dimensional object (Tyler, 1992, as cited in Bennett, 2006). Both the
theories of semiotics and of rhetoric acknowledge that the audience plays a proactive, if not a
11
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
more dynamic role, in this process of persuasion. In semiotics (i.e. the study of signs, symbols
and their interpretation), the audience “holds or recognizes certain beliefs and reads messages
based on these beliefs” (Tyler, 1992, as cited in Bennett, 2006, p.37). Hence, the interpretation
of a visual image is often specific to that individual. The rhetorical view of communication
design, on the other hand, categorizes the audience as a dynamic participant where with the
designer they co-construct the meaning and interpretation of a visual image (Tyler, 1992, as cited
in Bennett, 2006). As previously stated, the interpretation of a visual image is on the whole
subjective making it even more imperative for any logo designer to capture a positive, allencompassing appeal that will achieve the goal of a candidate’s election, regardless of varying
individual interpretations given to it.
The theoretical foundations of semiotics and rhetoric discussed above are seen in Nimmo
and Savage’s (1976) empirical findings regarding a voter’s interpretation of a candidate’s image.
In their study, many respondents defined the term image as “a mental construct,” while others
defined it as “visible attributes of a product, object or person…that is ‘projected’ or ‘transmitted’
to the consciousness of an audience.” Combining these definitions, Nimmo and Savage
concluded that the process of image making is “an interactive one, shared by the voter and
candidate, and in any case a profoundly important occurrence in any campaign” (Nimmo &
Savage, 1976, as cited in Kendall & Paine, 1995, p. 26). They insinuate that the goal of a
political candidate as a “designer” of his own logo image is to generate a favorable response of
himself to his audience while still allowing that same audience to develop an independent, albeit,
positive interpretation of the candidate. When the audience plays a proactive role in the
interpretation of the image, they get a sense of empowerment and ownership as a co-constructor
or co-designer of the image with the candidate. This contributes to a more favorable view of the
12
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
candidate and is consistent with the rhetorical view of visual communication. A logo should not
just be a means to an end—i.e., a visual that lets voters know this is Candidate A and he/she is
different from Candidate B. The development of a political campaign logo should be
comprehensive — a purposeful, visual representation of the candidate, and one that resonates
with the public.
To better understand the importance of a political logo and how a logo and image will
positively resonate with the public, it is important to also understand voter types and how they
process visual information. Kendall and Paine (1995) highlighted two models of voting publics:
(1) the rational voter model and (2) the active voter model. The rational voter model assumes
that voters will make their decisions under complete certainty, conduct the most comprehensive
gathering of information on a candidate and take into account all other plausible alternatives by
ordering them into some sort of evaluative criteria (Kendall & Paine, 1995). The rational voter
model has limited empirical evidence since most voters do not have access to or even have the
time to gather the most comprehensive information that enables them to exhaustively evaluate
political candidates. The limitations of the rational model lead us to Nimmo’s (1978) review of
voter models focusing specifically on the “active voter”. As opposed to the rational model, the
active voter model postulates that a person “engages in voting as a ‘minded behavior’ and not
necessarily a rational one” (Nimmo, 1978 as cited in Kendall & Pane, 1995). To clarify, the
active voter model posits that the voting process is one where the audience receives and
interprets symbols and campaign images in accordance with their own perspectives and opinions
(Nimmo, 1978 as cited in Kendall & Pane, 1995). While rational voters aggressively and
actively seek all information about the candidates, the active voters are also engaged, but differ
from rational voters in that they seek information by selecting and “sifting through” the political
13
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
environment – a barrage of information regarding a candidate’s policy positions, leadership
qualities and character on top of prior performance and experience (Brader, 2006). Although
these models present some accurate behavior on the part of the voting public, they are actually
incomplete. Both the rational and active models focus only on a demographic of the voting
public who are considered proactive on different levels. These models do not take into
consideration a large amount of the voting population that would generally fall in a category of
the apathetic voter or inattentive public (Kendall & Paine, 1995).
In general, a lot of people do not focus on politics and issues that are remote to them, or
only do so when the issues personally affect them. People are generally “cognitive misers,”
using shortcuts or heuristics when making voting decisions (Graber, 1985, as cited in Kendall &
Paine, 1995, pg. 23). A campaign logo and the image that it projects is an example of such a
heuristic. The public is selective in what they hear or read about the candidate and prefer to hear
what they want to hear. So it is important that communication practitioners capture the public’s
interest in visuals, where “one look” captures all they want to know. A candidate’s political
campaign logo should resonate not just among rational and active voters but also to a major
section of the voting public that falls under the categories of apathetic and inattentive. It is this
specific voter demographic where a logo can have a great impact and merits more focus and
study. One should, however, remember that this large part of the voting population is not
necessarily lacking in reason because many people are highly intelligent and capable. While
they may not be actively seeking information about a candidate, they may rely on their ability to
provide a more meaningful interpretation of a candidate through the logo, the visual image that
was created to summarize a candidate.
14
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
Understanding the role of the audience and voter types puts the importance of logo
development into perspective, as it is not beyond the apathetic/inattentive voter population to
rely on and utilize a visual image to navigate through a busy political landscape. One
characteristic that a logo must have is that it is aesthetically pleasing to the viewer. This next
section will discuss effective design principles to be considered when creating a logo. It will
focus on the visual characteristics that can render a logo effective for the types of voters
discussed above.
Effective Logo Design Principles
Verbally communicating a campaign message or a candidate’s brand may be quite a
daunting task. This is where a logo design presented to the eyes of the voting public can help
elucidate a more meaningful interpretation that message, consistent with the expected goal and
objective of the political campaign or the candidate. Previous literature on the subject of logos
have not determined a universal set of predictions on what types of designs should be selected
and/or created in order to achieve the desired response for a logo specifically in a political
campaign. However, this literature review looks to a study conducted by Henderson and Cote
(1998) that involved an evaluation of two main dimensions of response and design of
corporate/company logos. The analysis outlined the characteristics and principles of logo design
that can powerfully increase a logo’s chances of being considered aesthetically pleasing to
viewers, thus evoking a desired response from them.
Henderson and Cote (1998) examined how variations in the design of a logo influenced
individuals’ responses along a variety of response dimensions. The evaluated response
dimensions included: (1) correct recognition - respondents in the study correctly recognizing
logos seen in the past; (2) false recognition - respondents believe they recognize a logo, although
15
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
have not seen it in the past; (3) affect - likability of the logo; and (4) familiar meaning - the
logo’s ability to capture a clear connotation of the product, service or company the logo
represents. The evaluated design elements included: (1) elaboration - complexity, activeness
and depth of the logo; (2) naturalness - an accurate depiction of the product/service it is
representing; (3) harmony and proportion - balance and the relationship between horizontal and
vertical dimensions; (4) parallelism – the placement of the images lines and elements being
adjacent to each other; (5) repetition – how similar elements are to each other within the image;
and (6) roundness – the use of circular elements (Kohli, Suri, & Thakor, 2002).
Henderson and Cote’s 1998 study recommends three “best practices” that
communications practitioners and graphic designers should take into account when creating a
strong and affective logo for their target audience: (1) create or select a moderately elaborate
logo; (2) the logo should exhibit an element of “naturalness”; and (3) the logo should have a high
level of meaning to its viewer. Descriptions of the three best practices are as follows:
Best Practice #1: Create or Select a Moderately Elaborate Logo.
The Henderson and Cote (1998) study found that a moderately elaborate logo design is
the most effective. With regards to design, an elaborate logo does not refer to the level of visual
intricacy per se. It is comprised of characteristics such as complexity, activeness and depth and
it is judged in its ability to utilize simpler design elements while capturing the concept or essence
of the image (Henderson & Cote, 1998). A logo designer needs to achieve a moderate balance
between “too much” and “too little” in order to sustain a viewer’s interest for a longer period of
time. Therefore, a logo should strive for creative use of simplistic visual elements, but moderate
elaboration in characteristics of complexity, activeness and depth so that regardless of repeated
16
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
exposure to the logo, the viewer remains interested and/or develops an increased likability of the
logo with more frequent exposure. Applying this practice to a political logo, a logo that is
visually too simple may not provoke the viewer’s internal desire to know the candidate better,
may simply find the candidate boring, or even worse—similar to his/her competitors. An overly
complex logo, on the other hand, may ultimately leave the viewer confused about the candidate.
Theoretical Application: Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM). This practice of
developing a “moderate” and yet elaborate logo has theoretical foundations rooted in the
Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) of persuasion. In the ELM, elaboration refers to the
generation of cognitive responses to communication messages—messages that can include visual
images such as a logo. The ELM asserts there are two routes to persuasion: (1) the
central/systematic route which is a process that requires a greater amount of thought with an
individual having a high motivation and ability to process information; and (2) the
peripheral/heuristic route which occurs when the individual has low motivation and ability to
process information and obtains information by reliance on superficial cues, such as credibility
of the source and source attractiveness, etc. (Petty, Priester, & Brinol, 2002). Therefore, a
moderately elaborate logo can effectively satisfy both routes to persuasion and thus be more
effective in persuading its audience regardless of how they process information presented to
them. A moderately elaborate logo design perhaps can offer elements that deliberately provide
an opportunity for several interpretations to the same image thereby enhancing cognitive activity
of an audience who processes information through the central/systematic route. The “central
route” audience draws their own conclusions from the logo, which would normally be in sync
with the purpose of the logo. These audiences can find a direct intellectual connection with
candidates through their logo. Individuals who are less inclined to do in-depth information
17
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
processing and would prefer to rely on heuristics, e.g. the superficial cues of a logo such as
bright colors or the use of a familiar image, will likewise find satisfaction and a sense of
identification as they quickly form their conclusions based on surface characteristics of the
design -- what is presented to them in the logo. Drawing on the literature regarding the types of
voters, it appears that rational and active voters are more likely to follow the central/systematic
route while apathetic/inattentive voters are more inclined to follow the peripheral/heuristic route.
Theoretical Application: Motivation, Ability and Opportunity Framework. Another
theoretical framework that supports Henderson and Cote’s suggestion to use moderately
elaborate logos is the Motivation, Ability and Opportunity (MAO) model. The MAO model
tends to target members of the inactive public and attempts to engage them in a level of
information processing that is higher than the superficial level. The motivation component is
responsible for the “heightening of arousal” so audiences will allocate cognitive resources to
process information or continue to process information (Hallahan, 2000). Within this
framework, proposed techniques to enhance audience motivation include the use of novel
stimuli, moderately complex messages, and sources that are attractive or similar to the audience
(Hallahan, 2000). Therefore, a moderately elaborate logo should employ techniques that
enhance a voter’s ability to process messages by tapping into the individual’s schema and
existing cognitive resources and appeal to his/her identity. One such way to accomplish this is to
use a combination of graphics, text and narration, concrete words and images, and recognizable
marks (logos, logotypes, trademarks and symbols). The logo designer should be visually creative
while avoiding distractions or complex arguments that will take away from the message and
must include “interactive” illustrations or images (Hallahan, 2000).
18
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
Best Practice #2: Create a Logo with a “Natural Image”
Another factor that contributes to positive affect for a logo is naturalness. Naturalness in
a logo is the “degree to how the design depicts the commonly experienced object” (Henderson &
Cote, 1998). Henderson and Cote (1998) determine that there are two ways naturalness can be
achieved: representative (the degree of realism in a design) and organic (designs made of natural
shapes—e.g., not geometric shapes but irregular curves). It is important to take into
consideration that the concept of “naturalness” in a logo should not be as natural as an image as
seen in a photograph. A simpler, yet accurate depiction of the intended object is appropriate and
more satisfying to look at (Henderson & Cote, 1998). This complements Gernsheimer’s (2008)
text that outlines ten elements to create an enduring logo. It states that a properly designed logo
is one that is “simple in its construction but not necessarily in concept” (Gernsheimer, 2008).
The concept should have depth and breadth with all its complexities, while projecting it in a logo
image that is simple and easy to understand. When a logo has a simplistic level of natural and
recognizable visual elements, it facilitates identification for its viewers.
An example of “simplistic naturalness” is seen with the evolution of the Prudential logo
(Figure 2). The logo was used to visually communicate that Prudential is the “rock you can rely
on,” (Prudential, 2010). Although the logos from 1870 to 1940 essentially exhibit a high level of
representative naturalness, they are extremely detailed and visually busy in their design. In
1984, Prudential began simplifying the level of representative naturalness by employing basic
geometric shapes to construct the rock image, which turned out to be abstract and almost
unrecognizable as the well-known “Prudential” symbol. As such, in 1990, the logo was
recreated with a more organic naturalness. In this case, it was Prudential’s most effective logo.
19
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
The image remains that of a simplified, organic “rock” as a silhouetted familiar image connoting
solidity, gracefulness and history (Prudential, 2010).
Figure 2: Evolution of the Prudential Logo. (Source: Prudential advertising campaign)
Best Practice #3: Create a Logo with a High Level of Familiar Meaning.
Another effective practice is to create a logo that displays a high level of familiar
meaning to its viewers. The easier a logo is interpreted by its viewers, the higher the likelihood
for recognition and being evaluated more favorably overall (Kohli, Suri, & Thakor, 2002).
Henderson and Cote (1998) also found that logos which share similarities to popular, more well
recognized logos – while more likely to be falsely recognized – can still be positively evaluated.
Theoretical Application: Dual Process Theory. Empirical evidence that provides further
explanation about the variances in logo preference is seen in Groves and Thompson’s (1970)
Dual Process Theory. This theory assumes that two underlying neural processes affect the
response to a stimulus: (1) habituation, a decrease in responsiveness and (2) sensitization, an
increase in responsiveness (Janiszewski & Meyvis, 2001). Sensitization depends on stimulus
intensity. For example, a high contrast stimulus is more interesting than a low-contrast stimulus;
a complex stimulus is more stimulating than a simple stimulus; and a significant stimulus is more
stimulating than an irrelevant stimulus (Janiszewski & Meyvis, 2001). This assumption is in
tandem with Henderson and Cote’s findings—salient logos are more meaningful, are
“conceptually fluent” and are more likely to be accepted by the viewer (Janiszewski & Meyvis,
2001). Factors of habituation are dependent on the intensity of a stimulus. Essentially, a less
20
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
intense stimulus will result in stronger habituation and thus a decrease in responsiveness and
interest at a faster rate (Janiszewski & Meyvis, 2001). Habituation at a faster rate will result in
loss of interest among viewers. For a logo to be effective, it should contain a meaningful design
that conveys a message that will not dissipate too quickly and instead enhance or heighten the
intensity of the viewers’ interest.
After gaining a better understanding of successful design principles, it is also important to
consider that an aesthetically pleasing logo may not always communicate the correct message.
To understand this phenomenon, the next section of this literature review will look at how factors
of emotion can affect interpretation of a visual image and how a design should be visually
structured to elicit the correct emotion or a positive interpretation.
Emotion in Logo Interpretation
Green and Loveluck (1992) laid out a psychological, theoretical framework that
contributes to our knowledge of how individuals view and interpret a corporation’s logo. The
findings from this reading merits inclusion in this literature review, as there are many aspects of
corporate logo design that can translate to and inform design practice in the development of
political logos. Green and Loveluck (1992) lay out three sources of information that contribute to
a person’s understanding of a symbol: “(1) the purpose of the communication; (2) the properties
of a symbol – referential and graphical; and (3) the context in which the symbol is seen.” To
clarify the first source of information, it is extremely important for individuals to understand that
properties of a symbol should be designed to communicate information about a corporation
and/or organization and to “…treat the symbol as relevant to what the company wants to say
about itself just as in a speech context we treat utterances of another person as relevant to that
context” (Green and Loveluck, 1992, p. 39). The second source of information that contributes
21
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
to a person’s understanding of a symbol can be best described using the example of the most
recent version of the Prudential Logo (Figure 2). The referential properties of a symbol allude
to what the symbol actually depicts. In this case, the symbol depicts a large rock— the famous
rock of Gibraltar. The graphical elements of the symbol refer to how the image is constructed
for the viewer. Referencing the Prudential logo, the graphical elements of the logo incorporate
the use of a two-toned image (light blue and white), where the rock image is circumscribed
within a circle, using simple and bold lines to create the whole image. The use of these types of
elements and the choice to incorporate the graphical elements in this way can connote different
meanings to different people. To further clarify this concept, the use of simple and bold lines to
create the rock logo can convey that the organization or company it stands for exhibits
characteristics of strength and power—positive attributes that exemplify a life insurance
company dedicated to serving and protecting the wealth of both individual and institutional
customers. To another person who may not be familiar with Prudential, the use of an icy blue
color can be off-putting to a viewer. Icy blue can connote characteristics of being a company
that is cold, not personable or not caring of their customers. In this instance, it is plausible that
the same logo evoking a positive response in the first example, can elicit a negative response
with another individual who had an unfavorable customer experience with Prudential.
The graphical and referential properties of a symbol as well as the context in which a
symbol is seen can produce various interpretations of its message. This is because visual
interpretations are almost always attached to emotion. Verbal communications tend to leave
their audiences in a more rational, logical and linear pathway of thought, while visuals have the
tendency to resonate with their audience on an emotional level, which in turn, can socially
engineer change in beliefs and in attitudes (Joffe, 2008). Because emotions are affected by the
22
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
quality of visual materials, it is essential to look into literatures regarding theories of emotion on
information processing and their application in order to help communication practitioners,
communication strategists, visual designers and candidates alike understand what elements of
emotion to consider when creating an meaningful political campaign logo.
Theoretical Application: Color Theory. When a person sees a logo, they are essentially
looking at the formation of carefully crafted colors and the shapes of those colors. The
appropriate use of color therefore is a powerful tool that stirs the emotion of viewers and allows
them to see in the logo the total expression of the candidate’s personality.
Extensive literature on color theory provides a set of theoretical constructs and guiding
principles that can be used to create harmonious color combinations that will render a logo as
aesthetically pleasing or extremely relevant. The assumption that color is a tool to evoke
emotion is seen in Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s (1810) Zur Farbenlehre (Theory of Color.) In
Zur Farbenlehre, Goethe divided all colors into two separate groups believing that colors are
linked to emotion. One group consisted of warm colors, i.e., red to orange to yellow, which
normally produces excitement among their viewers. On the other hand, cool colors, i.e., green to
blue to violet, produce “unsettled feelings” (Stone, Adams, & Morioka, 2006). Referring to
Figure 3, Goethe claimed that the combinations of IC, IIC, IIIC, and IIA in his color triangle
produced a “serene” color palette (Stone, Adams, & Morioka, 2006). In accordance with the
previously discussed concept of subjectivity in visual communication, this color palette is
interpreted as such by its viewer. Depending on how this color combination is used and what it
is used for, will determine if this palette really is considered “serene.”
23
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
Figure 3: Goethe’s Color Triangle. Color Mixing and Goethe’s Triangle.
It is important to note this subjectivity exists because the “human eye and brain
experience color physically, mentally and emotionally” (Stone, Adams, & Morioka, 2006).
Consequently, colors themselves have meanings that are culturally defined and agreed upon, so it
is important to have a grasp of the various meanings and investigate how colors differ culturally
before selecting colors for a logo.
Supplemental literature further shows color’s effect on emotion through Brader’s (2000)
study in the use of emotional appeals and political ads in the 2000 election. One area of his
study focused on color in political advertisements and found that color is related to emotional
cues. While his study focused specifically on political advertisements cuing emotions of fear
and enthusiasm, this can certainly be translated to the selection of colors in the development of a
political logo. He found that specific color schemes appeal to primary emotions. For example, a
black and white color scheme or a dim/dark color palette connote fear or anger, while bright and
colorful imagery produces the opposite effect, by cuing emotions of enthusiasm or pride (Brader,
2006).
Emotions are reactions that are short-lived, intense and directed to some sort of external
stimuli, whether it be an event, object, image or person (Nabi, 2002). Therefore, in the realm of
politics and political elections, evoking the right emotion at the right intensity and at the right
24
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
time can convince a voter to cast their vote for the candidate they emotionally connect with. The
following theoretical applications contribute to understanding the role of emotion as it relates to
the design realm.
Theoretical Application: Appraisal Theory. The core tenet of appraisal theory is that
emotions are drawn out by an individual’s evaluations of events and situations (Roseman &
Smith, as cited in Scherer, Schorr and Johnstone, 2001). With regards to the development of an
image such as a campaign logo, designers, communication practitioners and campaign strategists
would aim to create an all-encompassing logo that elicits the proper emotion, ostensibly sending
out the proper message about the candidate. It is plausible that an image deemed positive by one
individual may evoke a negative emotion in another individual. Appraisal theory can provide an
explanation for the differentiated nature of emotional responses to a visual image. While there is
limited literature on the subject of logo design, Desmet (2002) examined how appraisal theory
can inform practitioners on how the appearance of products (product design) can evoke specific
emotions in the viewer (Demir, Desmet & Hekkert, 2009). In his assessment, he narrowed
product appraisal (the effect of a product on one’s well being) down to four main types: (1)
relation of a product to one’s goals; (2) sensorial appeal of the product; (3) the legitimacy of an
action represented by the product; and (4) novelty of the product (Demir, Desmet & Hekkert,
2009). With the first product appraisal, the relation of a product to one’s goals, the end user is
concerned with “how does this product meet my goals, beliefs, or standards? And how is it in
line with my personal well being?” The second appraisal, sensorial appeal, refers to our
dispositional likes, tastes or attributes in a product. A product that is in line with our attitudes
will be appraised as appealing, while one that is not in line with our attitudes is unappealing.
The third appraisal, the legitimacy of an action represented by the product, depends on whether a
25
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
product is perceived to meet our standards and reflect the norms and beliefs of how things should
be. The fourth appraisal focuses on the novelty of the product. Novelty refers to how much a
product deviates from the norm or from our expectations of how it should be. A product
appraised as novel, will result in an emotion of pleasant surprise from the viewer.
Another design study relying on the core assumptions of the appraisal theory were seen in
Norman’s (2004) article that incorporated the role of mental processing and its effects on
affective responses. He asserts that processing occurs on three different levels, and to
complement each of these levels, he proposes three design strategies:
(1) Visceral: governs responses through direct perception.
• Design strategy recommended: design for appearance.
(2) Behavioral: involving learnt but automatic affective responses.
• Design strategy recommended: design for ease of use.
(3) Reflective: involving affective responses due to conscious thinking.
• Design strategy recommended: design for reflective meaning.
(Norman, as cited in Demir, Desmet & Hekkert, 2009, p.41).
Theoretical Application: Affective Intelligence. For further insight and understanding
into the role of emotion within visual images and its influence on political behavior, it is
necessary to focus on Marcus, Neuman and MacKuen’s (2000) theory of affective intelligence
which states that there are two parallel emotional systems in operation that work to shape the
voting citizen’s choices and political behavior (as cited in Brader, 2006). The first is the
disposition system, which regulates the motivation of a person to act on their existing political
habits, e.g., partisanship, prejudice toward a candidate, or predispositions. The second is the
surveillance system, which is triggered by a threatening condition of “awakening” citizens into
an anxious state that encourages them to consider other choices (Brader, 2006). With images
that evoke a positive mood for the viewer or if a viewer is already in a positive state, viewers
tend to engage in “top-down” processing, relying on pre-existing beliefs or heuristics such as a
visual image. On the other hand, with images that evoke a negative mood, or if a viewer is in a
26
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
negative mood, viewers tend to engage in “bottom-up” systematic processing, where
interpretation of an image comes from data or information given to the viewer (Schwartz, 2000
as cited in Brader, 2005).
For the purposes of this literature review, it is important to focus specifically on positive
emotional appeals that would help create an effective political logo because in a presidential
election, a logo serves as the shorthand image of a presidential candidate. Brader’s (2005)
research looked at enthusiasm (a positive emotional appeal) and its impact in an election
campaign. He revealed that the findings were in accord with the theory of affective intelligence,
whereby enthusiasm appeals led viewers to rely on their pre-existing beliefs and preferences to
choose a political candidate. In addition, enthusiasm appeals generated more overall interest in
the candidate’s political campaign (Brader, 2005). Perhaps the theory of affective intelligence
suggests that a logo might have the most positive effect on people who already hold the same
views as the candidate, reinforcing their existing loyalties to that candidate and the party it
represents. In order to garner a positive response across political party lines and resonate with
others that many not hold the same pre-existing beliefs, the logo must be structured and designed
in a way to positively promote the stability of the candidate to become the president.
Literature Review Summary
As discussed throughout this literature review, a political logo is an integral piece of
communication when structuring a political marketing campaign. The design practices and
principles as well as the theoretical foundations presented in this literature review are a
summation of criteria and elements to be considered when creating an effective logo. This
includes several design best practices such as: (1) the creation or selection of a moderately
elaborate logo; (2) must exhibit an element of “naturalness”; and (3) have a high level of
27
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
meaning to its viewer. The first two practices lean more towards design principles and focus on
graphical properties that render a logo aesthetically pleasing. While logos can be aesthetically
pleasing, that may not mean they are effective. Therefore, the third best practice suggests that
designers and practitioners should greatly consider the referential properties of a logo, which
warrants a strong focus on factors such as emotional elements in the processing of a visual
image. This affects how a logo image is received and interpreted when viewed by the audience.
While this literature review established criteria that were not specifically geared toward
political logo design, this capstone will also investigate if such practices and principles are
applicable to presidential campaign logos. Incorporating and adopting general best design
practices as they relate to logos may contribute to an aesthetically pleasing political candidate
logo. A logo can ostensibly serve as a powerful mode of political communication in a
presidential campaign. The next section of this capstone will discuss the methods used in
tandem with these best practices garnered from this literature review to analyze the effectiveness
of three presidential logos.
28
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
CASE PROFILE
The literature review focused on theories and principles of design that result in the
production of an effective corporate or organization logo. It is noted, however, there is a lack of
literature that zeroes in on the design of a political logo that is powerful and encompassing of a
political candidate. It is therefore interesting to be able to see to what extent the best practices for
logo design by companies or other organizations can be applied to the logo design for a political
candidate. How are the processes of creating a corporate logo similar or different from that of a
political logo? Where are the points of convergence and divergence when it comes to best
practices and principles of design? Will the same principles and practices applied in an effective
or highly successful corporate logo design result in a successful political logo? Just as an
effective corporate logo design translates into company profits, will an effective political logo
translate into election of a political candidate? This capstone aims to investigate the principles
and best practices in corporate logo design and how they can be successfully applied to creation
of political logos. This capstone uses a semiotic analysis approach in order to inform our
understanding of the effectiveness, strengths, weaknesses, and how an individual can derive
meaning from a political logo image.
Choice of Logos
This capstone is timely in that both during and after the 2008 presidential election,
political campaign strategists, marketers and graphic designers saw merit in Obama’s
implementation of a powerful and effective logo from the beginning of his campaign until after
his election as president. Understanding the elements of what makes a political logo effective
will be beneficial for future candidates announcing their intent to run for the 2012 presidential
election and beyond.
29
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
To satisfy the recent interest in this area, this capstone will look into the political
campaign logos of two successful presidential candidates (Barack Obama [2008] and George W.
Bush [2004]), and that of an unsuccessful candidate (John McCain [2008]). It is important to
note that this capstone does not solely attribute the successful election of Presidents Obama and
Bush to their respective logos, although the impact of their logo designs may be rendered
“effective” and “successful” in highlighting the candidates that increased the public's interest in
getting to know them more. Conducting a semiotic analysis on a logo used by a winning
candidate versus that of candidate who did not win offers a contrast that provides context on how
an aesthetically pleasing logo can sometimes convey unintended meaning.
Although there are many variations of the presidential candidate logos (due to the voting
public posting different iterations that may not have been the original version), this capstone
chose to select logos from a presidential candidate logo and website repository called
www.4president.org.
Semiotic Analysis
Semiology is essentially the study of "signs" and hence, semiotics can equip sign or logo
analysts with the proper tools to enable them to systematically approach sign systems in order to
understand how a sign or signal produces its meaning (Penn, 2000). The concept of semiotics
has its foundation rooted in Ferdinand de Saussure’s work in structural linguistics. A linguistic
unit is called a “sign,” and a sign is divided into two parts: (1) a signifier – the form it takes; and
(2) the signified – the concept it represents (Penn, 2000). These two concepts are closely related
and inter-connected to each other. While the signifier and signified can be analyzed separately,
they only exist as components of a total sign system and, therefore, they cannot exist without
each other. It is important to keep in mind that in delving into the meaning of a sign, the
30
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
assessment of its two parts — the signifier and the signified — are taken together when in
“relation to their structures and their structural relationships with other signs” (Dyer, 1986, p.
123). From Saussure’s foundation of semiotics, other scholars have developed different
variations on how to analyze images.
Images have a “polysemic” (ambiguous) nature, therefore variances in sign/symbol
interpretation are influenced by factors such as: (1) culture; (2) the individual; and (3) elements
of the image such as typography, captions and colors (Penn, 2000). Penn notes that because of
their polysemic nature, images sometimes require accompanying text. The accompanying text,
referred to as anchorage serves to clarify and disambiguate the image (2000). At other times,
both the image and text are presented simultaneously to clarify the overall meaning of the image.
This is what is referred to as relay. It is important to note that written and spoken
communication differs from visual communication in that with written and spoken language,
signs appear to the audience in a controlled and carefully calculated sequence. However, in
images, all elements of a visual sign are presented to the viewer simultaneously, where there is
less control in dictating the message sequence to its viewer (Penn, 2000).
Based on the foundations formed by Saussure and Pierce, other scholars have examined
and focused on different aspects of sign relationships. Moriarty (2005) asserts that in the theory
of signs there is a “notion of oppositions and their role in creating meaning” that should be
considered. In this regard, a semiotic analysis would then consider the difference between the
denotative and connotative meanings of signs.
Denotative versus Connotative Relationships. When conducting a semiotic analysis of
an image, a denotative inventory would consist of a direct and specific description of the
signified. This inventory is a literal description of what the viewer sees. To conduct a
31
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
connotative inventory is to actually delineate what meaning the visual image evokes. Moriarty
(2005) refers to this as the “cultural baggage” related to or associated with the visual image.
Highlighting the “cultural knowledges” and “syntagm” associated with an image can provide the
viewer with further insight and information into the image’s meaning.
An example of “cultural knowledges” needed to provide context to an image’s meaning
is seen in the selection of an eagle as American University’s mascot. In order for a viewer to
properly draw a connection with the eagle representing American University, it is useful to know
is that in the United States, the eagle is a symbol of America and patriotism. First
President, George Washington expressed a dream of having a “national university” in
Washington, D.C.—the nation’s capital (American University: History, 2011). After
understanding this context of why the university was built, American University can be
meaningfully embodied in the form of an eagle.
Exploring the “syntagms” or syntagmatic relations of a sign informs how the elements of
a visual are juxtaposed and patterned can elicit various meanings and interpretations. Such
elements include: color, size, positioning, cues of emphasis and relationships of the elements to
each other (Penn, 2000). Penn (2000) demonstrates a syntagmatic relationship using a Givenchy
perfume advertisement’s choice of typeface. She systematically outlines the elements of case,
orientation, letter proportion and typeface style to derive visual meaning from the word
“Organza” in the advertisement. (Refer to Figure 4 for an image of the advertisement and Table
1 for the results.) It is important to note her analysis included the “unchosen” syntagmatic
elements in order to understand what other typeface options could have been incorporated into
the image. Utilizing other syntagmatic elements would have changed the visual meaning of the
typeface and the advertisement as a whole.
32
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
Figure 4: Givenchy “Organza” advertisement.
Penn describes the font selection of the word “Organza” as “handwritten… suggests an
afterthought: a caption supplied to the already complete image. The Z is drawn with a flourish
and the letters are clearly formed italicized capitals, suggesting perhaps flair, optimism and
extraversion” (Penn, 2000, p. 235). Incorporating the other syntagmatic choices from Table 1
and manipulating the advertisement to display the word “Organza” in a form opposite from the
advertisement—e.g., using lowercase letters, roman orientation, expanded proportions and a serif
font— the visual meaning of the word “Organza” will ostensibly change. Figure 5 shows a
mock Givenchy advertisement with a new set of syntagmatic elements. The manipulated
advertisement loses the original suggestion of “flair, optimism and extraversion.” While the
choice in typeface it is still visually appealing, the new font combined with the original image of
the woman and the perfume bottle gives off a completely different vibe. The manipulated
advertisement now seems to imply the perfume is for more conservative, subdued, classy and
elegant types of women.
33
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
Figure 5: Typeface change in the word “Organza”
Semiology is applied to a variety of sign systems ranging from fashion, architecture, and
consumer products to publicity methods (Penn, 2000). The goal of the semiotic analysis is to
elicit the cultural knowledge that is required for the viewer to understand the image and its
intended meaning (Penn, 2000). Considering Moriarty’s notion of opposition, Penn outlines a
semiotic analysis approach that is best applied to advertising images. This approach is most
closely related to an analysis of logos, as logos are in essence, a form of an “advertising image”
for a presidential candidate. This capstone models the semiotic analysis method created by Penn
(2000) in the comparative study of the effectiveness or non-effectiveness of the political
campaign logos of Obama, Bush and McCain. Each of the three presidential candidate logos
was analyzed denotatively then connotatively, following the steps outlined in Figure 6.
34
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
35
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
CASE ANALYSES & DISCUSSION
Denotational Inventory
The capstone used Penn’s (2000) semiological method of analysis. The analytical process
began by conducting a denotational inventory of each presidential (Obama, G. W. Bush and
McCain) candidate logo. The inventory focuses on the literal elements of the logo, which were
grouped into two main components: text and images. The text inventory for each candidate logo
took into account the location of text, the characteristics of the font and the color of text. The
image inventory notes the use of colors, shapes and textures, and how these elements were
combined to create an image. Appendix A (page 58) features a full table showcasing the
denotational inventory’s findings.
Higher Levels of Signification (Connotative Inventory)
The connotative inventory builds on the groundwork laid out by the denotational
inventory in order to create a more meaningful analysis of the elements used in the discussion.
The connotative inventory asks a series of related questions for each specific element (Penn,
2000). Examples of questions in a connotative inventory are listed in Figure 6. Conducting a
connotative inventory is essential because visual elements are polysemic and the various
interpretations of a visual image can contribute to more than one higher order sign.
Highlights of the connotative analysis of the three political logos derived from the
discussions of several important elements of the logo are presented. Comprehensive tables
(Appendices B, C and D on pages 59-61) showcase the full results of the connotative inventories
conducted for each of the presidential candidate logos.
36
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
Element 1: Text.
In all three of the presidential logos, the names of both the presidential candidate and
their vice presidential running mate are featured, with the presidential candidate’s name listed on
top. This connotes that the presidential candidate should be the viewer’s main focus. While
their running mate remains important, the name rests below the presidential candidate’s name
implying a more subordinate position and supporting role. This concept of primary-subordinate
positioning of the names in text is conveyed more effectively and clearly in the logos of both
Obama and Bush than that of McCain’s. Although Biden's name utilizes the same typeface as
that of Obama’s name, the size of Obama's name is larger and more prominent, suggesting the
more important role of a U.S. President. The same is observed in Bush’s 2004 logo where
Cheney’s name is smaller than that of Bush’s. On the other hand, the typeface and size of
McCain’s name in his campaign logo is the same as his running mate, Palin. The similarity in
typeface and size as a design choice can elicit varying interpretations from different viewers. It
can connote equality in importance of McCain and Palin as candidates and the positions they are
seeking. For voters who want to see a woman serving in a high position as the Vice President of
the United States, this equal font size may be viewed favorably because it reinforces the idea that
there is no reason why a woman cannot serve in a high political office as the president’s back up.
The McCain/Palin logo suggests that McCain and Palin have equal abilities to run the country
and strengthens the position of gender equality. Alternatively though, this logo may not sit well
with viewers who want to see a distinction between the role of the president and vice president.
It can run the risk of being counterproductive when other viewers and the media start to shift the
attention to the vice presidential candidate and in his/her qualifications to the President’s
successor should he become incapacitated. As can be seen throughout the campaign, the media
37
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
coverage portrayed Palin as unfit to serve as McCain’s backup. As seen in the unfortunate
interview with Katie Couric and the Saturday Night Live parodies, Palin’s political inexperience
and naivete became a source of humorous mockery of her capabilities and what she stands for.
At a pivotal point in the campaign, Palin's lack of achievement became the center of focus
instead of McCain's experience, abilities and achievements.
The choice of the style of fonts/typefaces is another area of focus when it comes to
designing of a political logo. The typeface style selected can have a direct or indirect impact on
the viewer who can attach various meanings based on font used. As seen in the Givenchy
“Organza” perfume logo example, the overall visual meaning of an image with supplemental text
is guided by its typeface selection. Alterations in the formatting of letters— the selection of a
serif font versus a sans serif font— have an impact in the connotation. Figure 7 offers the visible
differences between the serif and sans serif fonts. The red lines in the last example indicate the
location of the serifs on a letter.
The denotational inventory (Appendix A) shows that each candidate utilized the
following font types in their campaign logos:
- Obama/Biden: Small capital letters, serif font
38
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
- Bush/McCain‘04: Bold capital letters, sans serif font
- McCain/Palin: Capital letters, (technically) a sans serif font
Many studies have been conducted regarding the readability of serif versus sans serif typefaces.
Studies have shown that serif typefaces are more readable than sans serifs; however, other
studies contradict those findings and found the reverse to be true. Regardless of the disparities in
these findings, one result that was consistent across these studies was that viewers deem
typefaces to be the most readable when exposed to typefaces that they are more accustomed to
and are often seen (Felici, 2003). Typical texts (books, newspapers, magazines) traditionally
utilize serif fonts for large amounts of text while a sans serif type is more often utilized in a
“display role” making titles and headings in advertisements more prominent (Felici, 2003).
Utilizing capital letters is a typical design choice for a typeface in a display role, and each
candidate effectively does this. Bush follows the norm by using a bold, sans serif typeface which
is a solid choice of lettering. This can connote the stance of business as usual, which may be
acceptable but does not stand out as much to the viewer. Obama, on the other hand goes against
the norm of “display roles” by using a serif font. Obama’s typeface is different from the
standard although it remains aesthetically pleasing and is an effective message conveyor of a
promise of “hope and change.” Using a polished, contemporary and atypical font such as the
serif font in the Obama/Biden logo is visually consistent with those themes, connoting to viewers
that Obama and Biden can provide a complete change from the Bush administration. McCain
and Palin’s typeface selection seems to be indecisive. While it technically employs a sans serif
font, there is some subtle making of serifs at the end of the character. This element of an “inbetween” font can come off as confusing leaving a question mark in the minds of the viewer and
a degree of uncertainty that McCain/Palin may not be sure of their stance or goal. Such choice
of an in-between typeface can be considered a “safe” font to use, where it may visually please a
39
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
wider audience but in reality convey the wrong meaning. The ambiguity in typeface selection
may project the Republican candidates as having no strong stand on policies and issues and
simply catering or accommodating to as many voters as possible. The McCain/Palin typeface
selected was called “Optima”-- the same font used in the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in
Washington, D.C. This design choice may have been deliberate for the purpose of highlighting
McCain's prestigious military career and his heroism as a Prisoner of War. While this design
choice most likely resonated well with McCain’s supporters, it may not have been a wise choice
at a time when many other Americans expressed a wish to withdraw troops. The militaristic
undertone of the logo can subliminally remind viewers of the fact that both McCain and Palin
were advocates of the troop surge in the Middle East.
Element 2: Inclusion of a URL.
The denotational inventory shows that two of the three logos (Obama and McCain)
incorporated web URLs which direct viewers to the candidate’s official websites where they can
obtain more information on the candidate, their political views and other campaign activities.
Though adding the website URL on a logo does not serve any artistic purpose, incorporating it
urges the viewer to take action in learning more about the candidate or gives voters an action
outlet and means to be more proactive in supporting the candidate's campaign. Unlike that of
Obama/Biden and McCain/Palin logos, the Bush/Cheney logo does not include a website URL.
This may be attributed to the fact that that in the 2004 elections, the emphasis on social media
was not as popular it was in the 2008 election. In 2008, Obama revolutionized his political
campaign by blitzing the public with both traditional and social media tools – e.g., blogging,
Facebook, Twitter, and even iPhone Apps (Seidman, 2008). The success of Obama’s campaign
in the social media realm is undoubtedly a best practice and will likely be incorporated in all
40
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
future presidential campaigns. Hence, for any future presidential campaign logo, a web URL
should be included in its design so that it prompts its audience to be more proactive and support
the election of a candidate.
Element 3: The logo image.
Each presidential logo includes a visual piece that represents the candidate and possibly,
their running mate. This area of discussion evaluated each visual in light of the three best
practices of logo design as outlined in the capstone’s literature review: (1) the creation or
selection of a moderately elaborate logo; (2) exhibition of an element of “naturalness”; and (3)
having a high level of meaning to its viewer which will be derived from the results of the
semiotic analysis.
The denotational inventory’s findings indicate that each logo utilizes simple geometric
shapes put together to create a meaningful image that is easily associated with the candidate.
Obama and Bush select a color palette that is typical of U.S. political logos: red, white and blue.
McCain uses blue, black and white which are also typical of political logos, however ventures
out by incorporating a yellow/gold color which is a non-traditional color for a presidential logo.
What follows is an explanation of how each logo incorporates aspects of the three best practices
above, coupled with a semiotic analysis to understand how logos may produce meaning to its
viewers.
Obama/Biden Logo Image
41
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
The Obama logo exhibits characteristics consistent with the three guiding principles of
effective logo development:
(1)
It is a moderately elaborate logo. While the logo colors and the pictorial
elements may be considered simple, it is presented in a creative and inventive way that renders it
moderately elaborate. The logo represents a sun over the horizon but at the same time also
serves as a rendition of the American flag. For those inclined to actively process information,
further scrutiny will show that the blue sky is the part of the arch that forms the letter “O” in
“Obama”. The “O” pervades in the logo, thus echoing the first letter of the candidate’s name.
This is a reminder to the viewer of who the presidential candidate is. Essentially, the logo may
solely represent Obama, even if the words “Obama Biden” were not underneath the image. The
image speaks for itself and stands for what Obama and Biden were campaigning for. For those
who are not as motivated to process in-depth information, the logo remains to have a strong
appeal, since it is an aesthetically pleasing logo. The moderately elaborate logo design offers
some freshness and novelty that is pleasing to the eyes and can persuade even an apathetic voter
to vote for Obama.
(2)
The logo displayed a level of naturalness with a simple design of the sun
coming over the horizon, a scene with which most people can identify. The sun, which is a
primary source of energy, presents a picture of the candidate as strong, energetic and
environmentally conscious. The red stripes of the flag that help form the other half of "O" image
can be viewed by the audience as the sun coming over rows of farmland. A piece of cultural
knowledge that is important to know is that farmland is an image that is historically used to
represent the American landscape. The use of color and basic shapes portray a concept of a
sunrise coming over the horizon—which to some audiences is symbolic and an effective visual
42
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
representation of “change” and a new day. The political promise of a new day is a similar theme
that resonated positively with voters in the 1980 election of Ronald Reagan as President. The
theme was revived in the Obama logo in the form of a horizon image that effectively captured
and conveyed to viewers Obama’s campaign messages of “hope” and “change” (Seidman,
2010).
(3)
The logo offered a high level of meaning with its viewing audience. Starting
with its color palette, the logo extracts the patriotic emotion of pride (a positive emotion) by
using red, white and blue. This color palette is almost always personally relevant and displays a
high level of meaning to Americans. With much hype and media coverage that questioned
Obama’s natural heritage and suggestions of not being American citizen, the decision to utilize
the patriotic colors of red, white and blue, may have been a strategic decision by designers to
allay any concerns of his citizenship or nationalistic leaning. The red, white and blue that
formed the “O” presents him without doubt as an American citizen.
The logo’s elements were visually broad, evoking and creating different levels of
inspiration that reinforced to its viewers all the ideals and change that Obama stood for. In fact,
it was broad enough that subgroups of Obama supporters including various cultural and minority
groups such as the People of Faith for Obama, First Americans for Obama, Kids for Obama and
Women for Obama, etc. adapted the “O” in their logos. Likewise, the logo was adapted into the
names of each of the 50 U.S. States (Figure 8). These adaptations of Obama’s logo, has allowed
audiences to attribute various meaning to Obama’s ideologies by making the logo a part of their
own individual initiatives that show support for their presidential candidate of choice—Obama.
Allowing the audience to be a “co-designer” of the Obama logo contributes to the appeal of the
43
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
image, rendering it more effective and meaningful to its viewers. The widespread use of the logo
has undoubtedly contributed to Obama’s level of exposure throughout the election campaign.
Henderson and Cote (1998) found that logos which share similarities in design to popular
and well-recognized logos not only have a higher likelihood of recognition, but also are more
positively evaluated. The Obama logo bears some sort of resemblance to the most recent version
of the Pepsi logo (Figure 9) in the overall shape, design concept and color selection. Pepsi,
which is a popular and a positively regarded product, has been around for many years. The logo
caters to the younger crowd or the older generation who wants to stay young — it connotes
innovation and yet remains a true classic. Throughout the years, Pepsi's marketing campaigns
utilized themes and slogans such as, “Be Young, Have Fun, Drink Pepsi”; or “Pepsi: The Next
Generation”, etc. Obama incorporated a “Pepsi-like” appeal to the youth of the country in his
campaign. In the 2008 election, one of Obama’s target demographics was the young voter. His
political logo image and design seem to have found its way to young voters who are partial to the
44
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
"Pepsi" appeal. In certain circumstances, familiarity breeds liking, and whether or not it was
intentional to adopt a similar feel to the Pepsi logo – the Obama logo gained an advantage.
Figure 9: Obama Logo vs. Pepsi Logo
Bush/Cheney Logo Image
The Bush/Cheney logo effectively incorporates aspects of each of the three design
practices resulting in a powerful impact and positive resonance to the viewers.
(1)
It is a moderately elaborate logo. Like the Obama/Biden logo, Bush/Cheney
utilizes the three most popular colors of red, white and blue in U.S. political campaign. While
Obama logo presents more creativity through the subtle re-creation of the American flag, the
Bush/Cheney logo incorporates this most patriotic symbol closer to its true form. Certain artistic
elements are incorporated into the design that shows viewers more than just an American flag.
Americans refer to George W. Bush as “W”. The “W” is abbreviated for George Bush’s
middle name – Walker. In short, “W” was not only a nickname, but also a way for Americans to
distinguish him from his father, George H.W. Bush, the 41st President of the United States. The
formation of the letter “W” is hinted in the angle of the flag’s sharp creases and corners. The
45
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
moderately elaborate Bush/Cheney flag therefore represents not only America and patriotism,
but also specifically refers to George W. Bush through the “W” formation.
Embracing the initial that was shorthand for Bush, there were other variations of the “W”
visual. Figure 10 shows an example of how a group took the actual “W” logo and applied it to
women who were Bush/Cheney supporters. The “W” gives an enhanced meaning where the
letter “W” literally stands for women and thus George W. Bush supports women. Another way
the “W” concept was popularly used was seen in the form of a square shaped, black bumper
sticker. The simple black background featured a stark white, serif letter “W” and underneath it
are the words in serif capital letters, “THE PRESIDENT” (Figure 11).
Figure 10: The “W The President” logo
(4president.org)
Figure 11: The “W The President” logo
(GeorgeWBushStore.com)
The “W” branched out in ways that suited a variety of demographics. The
www.GeorgeWBushStore.com created several departments that targeted specific demographics
to sell “W” memorabilia to (Hockett, 2005). Departments such as the “Farm Ranch Team” and
“Across America Racing Team” appealed to rural voters by creating “W” logos that displayed
characteristics similar to the John Deere logo or the NASCAR racing logo. The “ ‘W’ The
President” department applied the logo in Figure 10 onto memorabilia that was directed to those
with more refined tastes and featured items like cufflinks, whiskey glasses, golf towels, golf balls
and cigars (Hockett, 2005). While this attempt to brand George W. Bush as “W” and using a
46
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
variety of “W” logos to appeal to different demographics was somewhat effective, Obama’s logo
proves to be more successful because his supporters utilize his actual, official campaign logo for
each group’s purposes. The strength of the logo helped establish visual consistency of Obama’s
campaign as opposed to the “W” logo. Obama’s logo avoided confusion among viewers,
provided cohesion among supporters and instilled a sense of solidarity throughout the campaign.
(2)
The logo displays a level of naturalness. The image of the American flag
exhibits a high-level of naturalness, featuring the familiar red and white stripes as well as white
stars on a blue background. One quick glance at the image is all the viewer requires in order to
register that it is an American flag.
It can be argued by some viewers that the “wave” of the flag looks rather unnatural and
too contrived. The ripples in the flag take on sharp, upward facing folds versus exhibiting a
more realistic, fluid motion as if the flag were actually flapping in the wind. Another point that
can be contested is that after further scrutiny of the flag, the viewer may see that it is not
accurately depicted. The flag displays only seven stripes instead of 13 and only 20 stars instead
of 50. In the real American flag, the blue area with the stars only occupy the top left hand corner
but the Bush/Cheney variation takes up the left third of the flag, expanding from top to bottom.
It is possible that there was an issue of space limitation or that putting 13 stripes and 50 stars
would make the logo look overcrowded. While it is plausible that the flag for logo purposes was
purely representational, it can be argued that the symbol is a misrepresentation of the real
American flag.
(3)
The logo offers a high level of meaning with its viewing audience. This logo
has several different meanings. A cultural knowledge that is important to know was at the time
of the Bush/Cheney campaign, the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 remained fresh in the
47
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
American public’s memory. As such, many Americans were not resistant to the idea of going to
war in defense of their country. Bush was catapulted into the position of a wartime president.
The overall political climate was focused primarily on issues of national security and being
“tough on terrorism”. Understanding this cultural knowledge, viewers may see that the flag on
the Bush/Cheney logo leans to the right, with the flag’s sharp creases coming forward, towards
the viewer. This can connote the candidates are sharp and tough on issues dealing with national
security and defending our nation from terrorist attacks. The rightward lean projected a sense of
“forward movement,” and ultimately “progress”. In addition, the right leaning text and the right
leaning flag tightly anchored against Bush’s name can conjure up ideas of right wing and
conservative ideologies which are extremely symbolic and meaningful to the Republican Party.
One way where the Bush/Cheney logo may have been unsuccessful was that during the
2004 campaign, many non-Bush supporting Americans believed that Bush did not have the
intelligence to become President. Myriad late night jokes and satires were directed at him and to
the non-supporters, the inaccurate depiction of the logo’s flag with 20 stars and 7 stripes
exemplifies his lack of wisdom and intelligence.
McCain/Palin Logo Image
While the McCain/Palin logo was could be considered aesthetically pleasing to some, it
failed to resonate well with many viewers. The logo follows some of the characteristics outlined
in this capstone regarding best practices of logo design. Yet, it does not have the same
48
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
widespread appeal that the Obama and Bush logos have. The semiotic analysis highlights its
shortcomings that can be attributed to its inability to satisfactorily reach a wider demographic of
voters.
(1)
Level of elaboration. The McCain/Palin logo is simplistic and does not exhibit
even a moderate level of elaboration. Although the image shows a naval star which may
enhance the simple nature of the design, there remains one singular meaning: the star stands for
someone who has heroically served in the United States Navy. Incorporating a star into the
McCain/Palin logo may go far enough to allow people to further elaborate that McCain's star
stands for excellence and has earned him the right and the qualifications to become the President
of the United States. However, because the star bears an exact resemblance to the U.S. Naval
award of heroism, this symbol can only successfully depict McCain as a war hero. It is difficult
to deviate from that meaning and most likely will not be interpreted in any other way. In a
nation tired of war, it is possible that the war hero depiction of through the use of the “star” was
not easily embraced.
(2)
The logo displays a level of naturalness. The image of the Naval star exhibits
an extremely high-level of naturalness. It is exactly what a Naval star looks like and therefore,
McCain’s logo adorns the most accurate representation of his service in the U.S. Navy. The
color selection was also the most natural choice if the designer’s aim was to highlight McCain’s
military career. Blue and gold are colors that are extremely reminiscent of Naval academy
uniforms.
3)
The logo offers a high level of meaning with its viewing audience. As
discussed above, the McCain/Palin logo exudes much appreciation of the U.S. military culture
and for McCain’s service as an officer. While this can be an admirable trait, it might not have
49
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
been the best image to set forth among the voters. For a logo that reminds voters that the
Republican candidate is a glorified war veteran who wholeheartedly supported the troop surge,
this visual may not serve as the best choice. The logo is more likely to be effective with people
who were already McCain supporters and know him as a person other than as a military man. In
addition, the logo remains a true represenation of McCain but seems to be disconnected to Palin
whose background is devoid of anything military. This implies that the presidential and vice
presidential candidates are not in sync.
As previously discussed, logos that share design similarities with a more recognized logo
have a higher likelihood of recognition, and can be more positively evaluated. Alternatively, a
logo can be negatively evaluated when a viewer falsely recognizes a logo and misinterprets its
meaning. Figure 12 shows the comparison between another popular version of the McCain logo
and the McCain foods company logo. While some of their syntagmatic elements are different,
the overall color scheme, layout and selection of elements are extremely similar, not to mention,
the names are exactly the same. This can lead to viewers becoming confused feeling as if that
they have seen the McCain campaign logo elsewhere, or worse, believing his campaign logo was
actually related to the food company.
Figure 12: The McCain Foods logo and the
McCain campaign logo
With the 2012 presidential election less than two years away, political candidates are now
beginning to strategize their campaign approach. President Obama has recently announced his
50
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
intent to run for re-election. With the success of the 2008 logo, Obama’s official website has
been revitalized while retaining the features of the original Obama/Biden “O” image. The 2012
logo uses a new and bolder typeface that is laid out in a different format (Figure 13). The viewer
sees some familiarity in the image and the bolder typeface emphasizes the partnership between
the President and Vice President, this time on more equal footing. This new logo is visually
strong but it would be interesting to see if it would undergo tweaks or changes when the actual
campaign starts. Will the same “O” image be as successful for 2012’s campaign purposes as it
was during the 2008 election?
Figure 13: 2012 Obama/Biden Logo
(www.barackobama.com)
This capstone provides a foundation of design best practices that can be utilized in future
campaigns. It highlights insights on the varied ways that people can derive meaning from an
image and looks into other syntagmatic properties that could be used in an image, all of which
will give the logo designers and/or political marketing teams a better idea in developing and
creating a political logo that would improve a candidate’s chance to get elected.
The capstone’s qualitative study has identified several limitations. Identification of those
limitations guides the direction and recommendations for future research in designing and
adopting effective political campaign logos. Note that the capstone conducts a thorough,
systematic semiotic analysis of three political campaign logos. The analysis, however, might
benefit from a more enhanced independent analysis by holding several focus groups or
conducting a qualitative survey to obtain a comparative point of view from others’ personal
experiences and individual “cultural knowledges” of events surrounding the political campaigns
51
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
of Obama, Bush and McCain. Acknowledging the polysemic nature of images, obtaining actual
responses from a variety of participants would have provided other interpretations that may not
have been considered in this capstone’s analysis.
Another limiting factor is that the political logos selected for the study reflect a snapshot
in time. The capstone may have benefited from conducting an analysis of the designs based on a
historical analysis of the political climate and cultural knowledges of presidential elections over
time. Often, design trends are influenced by art, pop culture and current events and it would
have been more useful if historical patterns of election victories or defeats are presented relative
to logos or through the design of other campaign materials. The possible reason behind this lack
of historical analysis is that emphasis on logos and branding of a candidate has not warranted
much attention until the late 1990s or even mid 2000s when social media and other media
campaign approaches have become critical in reaching the voting public.
The study was also limited by the selection of only three political logos and its analysis
for the capstone. With two logos producing two presidential winners and one logo for a
candidate that lost the election, there might have been implicit bias in the analysis of each
political candidate’s logo. The logos of Obama and Bush may have gotten a more favorable
analytical review than that of McCain’s logo. Of course, this cannot be specifically pinpointed
since there is a high degree of probability that the loss in the election by McCain may be due to
the ineffective logo he used. Time and resource constraints prevented a more in-depth
comparison that will ensure non-bias in the study. It would have been ideal to have a focus
group where participants can look at different variations of each of the three candidates’ logos.
Each of the logo designs would be manipulated and presented with different options of
syntagmatic features, colors and changes in format in order to gain more insight as to why the
52
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
design choices for each presidential logo are more effective than others and how the logos could
be improved. Another approach could involve conducting focus groups where respondents are
presented with hypothetical “presidential candidate profiles” featuring information on a
candidate’s background, political ideologies and stances. The next step would involve
presenting the viewers a series of pre-designed logos for each candidate. Moderated discussions
will elicit the focus groups’ perspective on a suitable logo design that fits the hypothetical
candidate. Results could indicate what types of logo designs are stronger and more effective in
portraying a presidential candidate.
CONCLUSION
There is no question that a logo is an important tool in any political campaign because it
is a vital form of political communication. However, the design of a strategic and effective
political campaign logo merits further study. A political campaign logo is a visual piece that
entices and lures an audience. It serves not only as an attention getter, but a way for constituents
to identify with a candidate who holds the same ideals and for supporters to visually state their
endorsement of a candidate. As seen with the Obama logo, a political logo can inspire people to
become proactive in an election.
This capstone’s research provides a platform in digesting how effective design principles
can be applied to logos, and how a denotative and connotative analysis contributes to our
understanding of how a viewer derives meaning from a political logo’s design. While design
trends often change over the course of time, this capstone references a general framework of
design best practices and its application in the design of a political logo. This capstone, however
acknowledges the fact that even if a logo is considered aesthetically pleasing and follows facets
of best design practices, it may not express the intended message or sentiment. For design or
53
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
campaign team members who are involved in the decision making process of selecting or
creating an effective political logo, they should keep in mind to pick not only an attractive logo,
but one that best represents the candidate in light of the existing political climate and resonates
with the wants and needs of the voters under circumstances that matter most to the public.
A logo is a small element of a political marketing campaign, but when properly designed
and used, it becomes a crucial element and an asset that could result in a candidate’s successful
election into office. Simply put: when it comes to politics, image is truly everything and for that
matter, a logo design may contribute to victory or defeat.
54
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
REFERENCES
Bennett, A. (2006). Design studies: Theory and research in graphic design. New York:
Princeton Architectural Press.
Brader, T. (2006). Campaigning for hearts and minds. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Brader, T. (2005). Striking a responsive chord: How political ads motivate and persuade voters
by appealing to emotions. American Journal of Political Science, 49, 388-405.
Demir, E., Desmet, P.M.A., & Hekkert, P. (2009). Appraisal patterns of emotions in humanproduct interaction. International Journal of Design, 3(2), 41-51.
Dennis, D. (2002). Inventing “W, the presidential brand”. In Hockett, J. (2005). Brand “W” and
the marketing of an American President: or, logos as logos. Westminister Papers in
Communication and Culture, 2(2), 72-96.
Dyer, G. (1982). Advertising as communication. London: Routledge.
Felici, J. (2003). The complete manual of typography. Berkeley, CA: Peachpit Press.
GeorgeWBushStore.com. (2011). Classic merchandise. Retrieved April 17, 2011 from
http://www.georgewbushstore.com/home.htm.
Gernsheimer, J. (2008). Designing logos: The process of creating symbols that endure. New
York: Allsworth Press.
Guzman, F. (2009). A Political Candidates Brand Image Scale: Are Political Candidates
Brands? Brand Management, 17, 207-217.
Green, D. & Loveluck, V. (1992). Understanding a corporate symbol. Applied Cognitive
Psychology, (8), 37-47.
Hallahan, K. (2000). Enhancing motivation, ability and opportunity to process public
relations messages. Public Relations Review, 26 (4), 463-480.
55
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
Heller, S. (2008, 20 November). The ‘O’ in Obama. New York Times. Retrieved November 15,
2010 from http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/20/the-o-in-obama/
Henderson, P.W. & Cote, J. (1998). Guidelines for selecting or modifying logos. The Journal of
Marketing, 62 (2), 14-30.
Hockett, J. (2005). Brand “W” and the marketing of an American President: or, logos as logos.
Westminister Papers in Communication and Culture, 2(2), 72-96.
Horn, R.E. (1999). Visual Language: Global Communication for the 21st Century. Bainbridge
Island: Macrovu, Inc.
Janiszewski, C. & Meyvis, T. (2001). Effects of brand logo complexity, repetition, and spacing
on processing fluency and judgment. Journal of Consumer Research, 28, 18-32.
Joffe, H. (2008). The Power of Visual Material: Persuasion, Emotion and Identification.
Diogenes-Sage Publications, 217, 84-93.
Johnson-Cartee, K.S., & Copeland, G.A. (1991). Negative political advertising - The coming of
age. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Kendall, K.E. & Paine, S.C. (1995). Political images and voting decisions. In K.L. Hacker
(Ed.), Candidate images in presidential elections (pp. 19-36). Westport, CT: Praeger
Publishers.
Kohli, C., Suri, R., & Thakor, M. (2002). Creating effective logos: Insights from theory and
practice. Business Horizons, May-June, 58-64.
Moriarty, S. (2005). Visual semiotics theory. In K. Smith, S. Moriarty, G. Barbatsis & K.
Kenney (Eds.), Handbook of Visual Communication: Theory, Methods and Media. (pp.
227-255). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Nabi, R. (2002). Discrete emotions and persuasion. In J.P. Dillard, J.P & M. Pfau (Eds.), The
56
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice (pp.289-308). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Organizing for America. (2010). Retrieved February, 2010 from www.barackobama.com
Penn, G. (2000). Semiotic analysis of still images. In M.W. Bauer & G. Gaskill (Eds.),
Qualitative Researching With Text, Image and Sound. (pp. 227-245). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Petty, R.E., Priester, J.R. & Brinol, P. (2002). Mass media attitude change: Implications of the
elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media
effects advances in theory research. (pp. 155-198). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Publishers.
Pittard, N., Ewing, M. & Jevons, C. (2007). Aesthetic theory and logo design: examining
consumer response to proportion across cultures. International Marketing Review, 24
(4), 457-473.
Prudential. (2010). Evolution of the rock. Retrieved December 1, 2010 from
http://www.prudential.com/view/page/public/16618?seg=5&name=NewAdvertisingCam
paign
Rand, P. (1991). Logos, Flags, and Escutcheons. Retrieved October 30, 2010 from
www.paul-rand.com
Roseman, I.J., & Smith, C.A. (2001). Appraisal theory: Overview, assumptions, varieties,
controversies. In K.R. Scherer, A. Schorr, & T. Johnstone (Eds.), Appraisal processes in
emotion. (pp. 1-19). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Seidman, S.A. (2010). Barack Obama's 2008 campaign for the U.S. presidency and visual
design. Journal of Visual Literacy, 29 (1), 1-27.
57
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
Stone, T.L., Adams, S. & Morioka, N. (2006). Color design workbook. Beverly, MA: Rockport
Publisher.
UnderConsideration, LLC. Speak up blog: The hardest working presidential campaign logo.
Retrieved April 9, 2011 from
http://www.underconsideration.com/speakup/archives/004262.html
Young, C. (2009). The power of visual images: Constructions of Mexicans in two 1996
presidential advertisements. In S. Barnes (Ed.), Visual impact: The power of visual
persuasion (pp. 117-134). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, Inc.
58
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
59
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
60
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective
61
Nee – What Makes a Presidential Campaign Logo Effective