To say there have been ‘reservations’ regarding the EU competition to design a new Europe-wide, compulsory organic logo might be an understatement.
We’ve expressed our own disappointment with the candidates we’re being asked to vote on*, but now there’s even some criticism from one of the judges who were asked to pick the final contenders; none other than the widely respected Craig Sams, founder of Green & Black’s (among many other successful organic brands), in fact.
Natural Products magazine reports on a letter Mr Sams has written to a German magazine outlining his concerns over the process, which he describes as “aspirational in the extreme” for its approach of only opening the competition to design students.
Craig Sams know a thing or three about branding and spoke on the subject at our Selling Organics: What’s the Story? conference in London, in October. It really is a shame that this process has to be mired in controversy when the sector has enough challenges to face without yet more bureaucratic mishandling to contend with.
And on the subject of voting for a logo, we have some other misgivings about how it’s being done. But more on that soon…
* Reference to our ‘disappointment’ is made with due respect to the so far anonymous designers whose entries made it to the shortlist of three. They’ve done very well to make it this far and have demonstrated great creativity, but it’s not their fault that what was really needed was a researched, tested and professional identifier that has to sit alongside some very expensive and carefully considered branding.
Just as an addendum to the last post; the Facebook page for the EU organic logo competition, containing just some examples of the entries, makes for interesting viewing.
It’s only a tiny fraction of the 3400 or so total hopefuls, but it at least gives some insight into some of the options we’re not being given the chance to vote on.
Today we see an interesting take on the EU organic logo vote, with one German lawyer suggesting that people vote ‘no’ by emailing the Commission.
A ‘no’ option has not been made available on the voting page – you have to choose one of the shortlisted options. Quoted in a piece on the Organic-Market.info website, the lawyer in question, Hans-Peter Schmidt, raises some interesting concerns about the choices and the process that led to them.
At the time of writing there have been just short of 30,000 votes on the official website.
Will you be voting? Or even voting ‘no’?
It’s really good to hear that Waitrose has put its weight behind the OrganicUK campaign to fund a three-year promotional bid for organics with EU matched funding.
We’ve been behind the initiative from day one, as have many of the country’s leading organic brands, not to mention an array of farmers and smaller processors.
Having bust through its £250,000 pledge target (in fact exceeding it by about £17k as of now) the organisers at Sustain are now pressing on to try and reach £300,000. Every penny will count because it can be matched with the EU money that’s available if the bid succeeds.
Many other EU member states have taken advantage of the cash over the last few years, some multiple times, but we’ve never got our act together in the UK – until now.
The bid would see a campaign highlighting the key benefits of organic food and farming across different media and utilising PR and social networks.
Well done to Waitrose for giving its backing to the sector in such a tangible way and there’s still time for others to get on board as well. It’s for everyone’s benefit.
So now we know what the compulsory EU organic logo could look like. But after all the (excruciating) build-up, it has to be said that the response here at the Old Estate Yard is one of being distinctly underwhelmed by the options.
We have three shortlisted finalists from a quite impressive 3422 entries. The trouble is, they all seem to be a bit dull and uninformative.
That’s not to be unkind to the artists who created them, who no doubt put in a lot of thought and effort, but this is a BIG thing for organics. Not only is it the introduction of a compulsory logo for the first time, but it should be an opportunity to strike a chord with consumers and create something that is instantly recognisable and understood as organic. We don’t really think any of the three chosen by the judges are going to achieve that.
What do you think?
These are your choices for the EU organic logo. So which will it be???
Even if you’re thinking “my five-year-old could have come up with something more exciting”, these are the options we’ve got. So, which will you vote for? It’s open to every EU citizen (though how they can rule out mischievous votes from beyond the Euro borders is hard to say…).
There is, I think, a clear favourite in our office, but everyone needs to cast their vote before the end of January, which you can do here:
http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/organic/logo/voting/voting_en.htm
Choose wisely…
[For details on the new labeling regulations, take a look at this page on our website. You can also follow some more of our thinking on the topic in this piece by Jess Halliday, at FoodNavigator.com]
Interestingly, following on from the last post, a new Defra-backed report has emerged which suggests that shoppers have a perception of organic food and farming that is beyond the practical requirements of the regulations.
The study, carried out by the University of Exeter, reports an ‘expectations gap’ between the reality of production and processing and the knowledge and understanding of shoppers. Read the Farmers Guardian report here.
This is not entirely surprising and is the kind of communication failure that we all hope will be addressed by the OrganicUK initiative (see previous post).
Unfortunately, whenever we read something like this you can bet it will be spun quickly into a story about organics misleading consumers. Again, that’s probably our own fault as an industry for letting ourselves get into that position. Now is the time to take serious steps to address the problem. It’s a bit of a shame, though, that Defra will fund this kind of research, but doesn’t seem willing to find money for the OrganicUK bid to the EU to help us move on from the problem.
organic food, University of Exeter
This morning brings the news that an advertising agency has been selected by the OrganicUK steering group.
OrganicUK is a project backed by businesses from across the organic sector with the aim of attracting pound-for-pound match funding from the EU to run a campaign that promotes organic food and farming to the public at large.
It’s an ambitious but necessary move for a sector of the food industry that is suffering from having too many messages communicated in too many ways; almost an embarrassment of riches when it comes to positive messages. These need to be refined and presented by experts in order to achieve maximum understanding among our audience.
Today it has been announced that Haygarth, an integrated advertising agency, has been appointed to carry out the campaign, which will initially use digital, press and PR activity, moving into full advertising if and when the bid is successful.
More than £201,000 has been pledged so far for the campaign, which will run over three years. There is a target of £250,000 still to be reached. That we have got this close is a credit to the sector, but as every organic farmer and food producer will benefit from the work, it would be fantastic to reach the target and give the bid the best chance of success. We’ve pledged. Will you?
