Designing the Facebook Company Brand • Hacker News Board

Re: Designing the Facebook Company Brand

#121

Post by Jldevictoria » Mon, Nov 04, 2019, 7:06 PM UTC

debaserab2 wrote: post #99

jawns wrote: post #7

Although a post about updated branding may seem benign, this is, I believe, a response to critics who believe the company should be broken up. For example: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/03/opinion/facebook-antitrus... https://www.wired.com/story/tim-wu-explains-why-facebook-bro... https://www.cnet.com/news/can-facebook-be-broken-up-what-you... Facebook is hoping that by differentiating its company brand from its fl…

The thing is, the differentiation that they tried to establish with the new branding is itself confusing. Using the same word just with different capitalization to specify between the company and the app is not going to help in any significant way since the two different logos can only be expressed differently in certain contexts. Which makes you wonder just how intentional that detail is.

I agree. The alphabet-google structure was much more convincing (Though they maintained the GOOG and GOOGL stock ticker symbol) I think at this point, they should be distancing themselves from the "facebook" brand since its popularity is in steep decline, and instead should have re-branded their larger business and software development infrastructure under a new name.

Re: Designing the Facebook Company Brand

#122

Post by filoleg » Mon, Nov 04, 2019, 7:08 PM UTC

ForHackernews wrote: post #33

MuffinFlavored wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is the government itching to break up tech companies? I feel like it's a bad idea for them to get involved at all.

Because big tech companies are now at the point where they can pick the winners in democratic elections, if they choose to do so.

Really? Doesn't seem like it worked out well for them during the last elections, given that people like Dustin Moskowitz and Larry Page were directly supporting and assisting the DNC campaign (with others assisting the campaign less directly).

Re: Designing the Facebook Company Brand

#123

Post by goatinaboat » Mon, Nov 04, 2019, 7:10 PM UTC

MuffinFlavored wrote: post #109

notatoad wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

as the power of the big tech companies approach the power of the government, governments are naturally going to seek to limit their power.

Can you elaborate how Facebook/Instagram/Twitter/WhatsApp/Google/Microsoft/Apple are approaching power levels of the government? I know that Facebook + Twitter political ads are "powerful", as well as "fake news" spreading when it is relates to politics. I'd be curious to hear any other examples if you have them.

how Facebook/Instagram/Twitter/WhatsApp/Google/Microsoft/Apple are approaching power levels of the government?

Remember Twitter gloating about its role in the Arab Spring? They’re a psychological weapon that can overturn societies overnight. And they’ll do it just for a few more ad clicks.

Re: Designing the Facebook Company Brand

#124

Post by hos234 » Mon, Nov 04, 2019, 7:11 PM UTC

jawns wrote: post #7

Although a post about updated branding may seem benign, this is, I believe, a response to critics who believe the company should be broken up. For example: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/03/opinion/facebook-antitrus... https://www.wired.com/story/tim-wu-explains-why-facebook-bro... https://www.cnet.com/news/can-facebook-be-broken-up-what-you... Facebook is hoping that by differentiating its company brand from its fl…

Facebook has no imagination. That's the consistent message.

Re: Designing the Facebook Company Brand

#125

Post by x220 » Mon, Nov 04, 2019, 7:15 PM UTC

filoleg wrote: post #122

ForHackernews wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because big tech companies are now at the point where they can pick the winners in democratic elections, if they choose to do so.

Really? Doesn't seem like it worked out well for them during the last elections, given that people like Dustin Moskowitz and Larry Page were directly supporting and assisting the DNC campaign (with others assisting the campaign less directly).

Google[1] and Facebook[2] have sponsored the Republican party. Both have accepted ad contracts from Republican candidates.

[1] https://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/google-gop-convention... [2] https://fortune.com/2016/05/07/facebook-confirms-it-will-spo...

Re: Designing the Facebook Company Brand

#126

Post by goatinaboat » Mon, Nov 04, 2019, 7:16 PM UTC

liquidise wrote: post #27

I've believed for some time that part of instagram's continued success comes from the average consumer being completely unaware that it is associated with facebook in any way. This change risks facebook's controversies becoming instagram's when consumers realize they could boycott both/either.

part of instagram's continued success comes from the average consumer being completely unaware that it is associated with facebook in any way

CNBC reported the other day that 71% of Americans are unaware.

Re: Designing the Facebook Company Brand

#127

Post by x220 » Mon, Nov 04, 2019, 7:19 PM UTC

unethical_ban wrote: post #64

dmix wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anti-trust laws are there for economic reasons, ie, monopolies preventing competition leaving society worse-off as a whole than can be gained from efficiencies of a single organization. It also typically requires proof of anti-competitive behaviour, beyond just being the biggest in the market. A lot of companies dominate their markets but don't engage in overt anti-competitive behaviour. I don't think they've ever be…

We've never had communications platforms so centralized, nor had comms companies with so much editorial control over peoples' exposure to information.

The United States Postal Service? Although it's illegal for them to open mail without a specific warrant.

Re: Designing the Facebook Company Brand

#128

Post by slenk » Mon, Nov 04, 2019, 7:28 PM UTC

tantalor wrote: post #21

saagarjha wrote: post #20

I’m all for more explicit disclosure of Facebook’s involvement in Instagram and WhatsApp, but aesthetically…I’m not sure I like it. What was wrong with the original logo and the “Facebook blue”?

Blue is generally poor choice for logos, it is hard on the eyes. Red is better.

Not if you're colorblind

Re: Designing the Facebook Company Brand

#129

Post by filoleg » Mon, Nov 04, 2019, 7:32 PM UTC

x220 wrote: post #125

filoleg wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? Doesn't seem like it worked out well for them during the last elections, given that people like Dustin Moskowitz and Larry Page were directly supporting and assisting the DNC campaign (with others assisting the campaign less directly).

Google[1] and Facebook[2] have sponsored the Republican party. Both have accepted ad contracts from Republican candidates. [1] https://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/google-gop-convention... [2] https://fortune.com/2016/05/07/facebook-confirms-it-will-spo...

They accepted ad contracts from both sides, while the leadership directly supported DNC. The pendulum was definitely on the DNC side when it came to support from tech companies.

Just because they were giving some support to the Republican party, doesn't disprove my assertion at all.

Re: Designing the Facebook Company Brand

#130

Post by iagooar » Mon, Nov 04, 2019, 7:36 PM UTC

I wonder how people feel about working for one of the most evil companies in the world? Do they even care? It's not like most people working there have no other options available, so it must be a well-thought decision. Or maybe they live in their own bubble where people actually believe in all the Zuckerberg lies?