As such, a big part of our job is research. Label reading, grocery shopping, and snooping in other people’s carts to see what’s out there, and how we can help our client position their product.

Recently, a new snack item hit the market. Snack Factories’ Pretzel Crisps. For those of you not familiar with this new snack, just imagine a small pretzel, smashed flat to make it more like a cracker. Easier to dip…less breakage in packaging….Now, this is not a client of goldfoot, (but wish it was). I bought a bag of their chips after hearing about the failed campaign, and gotta say…Amazing flavor, wonderfly designed chip, picked up by the Trader Joe’s Moothership, and just…damn tasty..especially when dipped in a spicy hummus.

Yet, People are in an outrage over this ad for Snack Factories’ Pretzel Crisps as the brand’s attempt at a play on words has come back to slap them in the face. Someone’s weight and appearance is obviously a very sensitive subject and should be considered carefully. A snapshot of the initial campaign:

If you think even in the slightest that the concept might be in bad taste, you’re among friends. There was an online outrage over the line (writer and art director identity protected here…), and controversy obviously hit their PR (and design) departments…and the line was modified. Quickly. New posters on the street today:

Obviously rushed…bad tag line, and some nasty leading…

Here’s the thing. Should a brand cave to controversy? Didn’t the first tag line earn it’s weight in gold by attracting such controversy? Or is “bad taste” (according to your consumers) destructive to your brand? Is all publicity good publicity?

Send me your  thoughts. We’ve many opinions of our own after 15+ years of dealing with these kind of situations, and eager to hear your stories.

San Francisco is called home by over 20,000 design professionals. With more designers per capita than any other city in the United States, it’s only fitting that the Mayor of San Francisco proclaimed this next week (June 14 – 20) as Design Week.

AIGA SF will be sponsoring a full week of events highlighting the diversity and professionalism of the design community around the bay. The goal is to raise public awareness of the impact that all design—graphic, product, interior, fashion, architecture, advertising, et cetera—has in the San Francisco Bay Area.

For a full list of events, take a peek at their website. Hope to see you at some of the events! Happy Design Week!

Have an event coming up? Wanna just say thank you? Check out this site created by AKQA London, to create your own, customized six pack (warning: it ain’t cheap).

The folks behind this European Fiat ad offer a literal and figurative “mindfuck” as brains bang like rabbits while an old Bollywood song plays in the background, all culminating into a scene that looks like it was left on Peter Jackson’s cutting-room floor in 90s. Thoughts?

Well done, kids. Well done.

Google formally unveiled “Google TV” a few days ago, and I’m excited. That said, I was also intrigued by Google Buzz and Google Wave…

Google TV product manager Salahuddin Choudhary on the official Google blog:

“Google TV uses search to give you an easy and fast way to navigate to television channels, websites, apps, shows and movies. For example, already know the channel or program you want to watch? Just type in the name and you’re there. Want to check out that funny YouTube video on your 48″ flat screen? It’s just a quick search away. If you know what you want to watch, but you’re not sure where to find it, just type in what you’re looking for and Google TV will help you find it on the web or on one of your many TV channels. If you’d rather browse than search, you can use your standard program guide, your DVR or the Google TV home screen, which provides quick access to all of your favorite entertainment so you’re always within reach of the content you love most.”

What this means is television and web, living in harmony, on your high-def TV (with a little converter box, or course). Logitech and Sony are both on board (future televisions will have Google TV built in). Given Google’s amazing distribution power, this may actually change how we receive content (and advertising).

There are a few key concerns, however:

1) Nobody know how much this will cost. If it is more expensive than your cable carrier, I doubt this will float.

2) Ease of use. It’s tough for people to walk away from familiarity (like, say, a remote control). Having tried to navigate NetFlix streaming content on my own television, let me just say, I know a whole lots of people who wouldn’t spend the time on the learning curve. Google had technical trouble during the demonstration. They used a wireless keyboard connected to a TV. Who uses a wireless keyboard to control their TV? Okay…I think my brother does… The tech company claims to be working on a new generation of remotes, but until they arrive, the service could be a serious pain in the ass.

The Networks:

If you’ve done any streaming of network television on your computer at all the past couple years, you’ll notice that networks are yanking shows from some online services, and getting into bed with others. They are stumbling (both forwards and backwards) trying to navigate the broadband distribution of television.

Hulu blocked Boxee from accessing its content on TV screens because its owners (which include NBC Universal, News Corp. and Disney) are trying to protect their core television businesses. They will likely block Google TV from accessing Hulu as well, but it doesn’t change that fact that the web to TV is upon us, and that it will be a pivotal time for the world of advertising.

Stay tuned.

Now, believe me when I say my work over the years has had it’s share of bashing. From work that was wildly successful in the consumer arena that was met with harsh criticism from my design peers, to design work that won all sorts of awards, but ultimately, rejected by my client. I’m no stranger to criticism.

Now, not wanting to cast stones, let’s just say I’m confused by the logo created for the 2012 Olympics in London. My whole life (even long before I got into this industry), I’d looked across the pond to the brilliant design coming out of London for inspiration. The level of talent and willingness to take risks in the UK has always been a motivating force.

But with the $800,000 budget for the logo for the 2012 Olympic Games in London (now officially launched), and the outrage from not only the design community, but the Olympic audience at large, I find myself scratching my head. What went wrong here? $800,000 is a lot of money to spend on a logo, and would buy you some amazing market research. Why is there such a backlash? Parodies of the logo are already popping up online, and the media is in full gear mocking the approved logo.

I haven’t heard anything from Wolff Olins, the firm that designed the logo, but I’m going to guess they feel the bashing is unfair. I do wish they’d unveil the work-flow and process for designing a logo that needs to touch the entire world (uhmm…a REALLY difficult and daunting assignment). But in the meantime, I’d love to hear your thoughts. Email me, or post your comments here!

Oh, and if you know anyone on the Olympic committee for any future games logos, I’m certain I can make time in my schedule!