January 17, 2008

United Negro College Fund Decides Its Great Tag Line Is a Terrible Thing to Waste

After four years of consultations with powerhouses in the fields of advertising, sponsorship, and marketing research, the United Negro College Fund has launched a new branding campaign that differs only subtly from its old one.

Far from ditching the memorable tag line it has relied on for more than three decades — “A mind is a terrible thing to waste” — the United Negro College Fund has made the tag line a more visible part of its new logo (right), to help ensure more people make the mental connection between the slogan and the organization.

At the same time, the organization has removed its full name from its old logo (below), choosing instead to prominently display its abbreviation, UNCF.

“I see the essence of our brand identity and our logo still there,” Michael L. Lomax, president of the United Negro College Fund, said today in unveiling the new branding campaign at a press conference at Spelman College, in Atlanta. “We are tweaking it,” he said, “but we are not changing it dramatically.”

The fund’s new logo is the product of a four-year effort involving the branding specialists Landor Associates, the advertising giant Young and Rubicam —which came up with the “mind is a terrible thing to waste” slogan 35 years ago — the research firm Peter Hart and Associates, the public-relations firm McKinsey and Company, and IEG, a major facilitator of sponsorship deals.

Hayes Roth, chief marketing officer of Landor Associates, said research into the old branding campaign showed that, while the “mind” slogan was widely known, just 56 percent of people mentally connected it with the United Negro College Fund. Moreover, many people were unaware that the fund has 39 member colleges — all private, historically black institutions — and knew little about the people it had helped.

At a time when it faces increased competition from other organizations focused on raising money for college scholarships, the fund was also concerned that some people regarded it as stuck in the past, Mr. Roth said.

To convey the impression that the fund is forward-looking, the torch that has long been part of its logo has been redrawn, so that the flames no longer rise straight into the air, but furl leftward, suggesting a torch being carried by someone who is moving ahead. Color has been added to the logo as well.

The fund decided against changing its name, despite some concerns that its use of the term “Negro” turned off some young people. “Changing the name of any organization is a risky proposition,” Mr. Roth said.

Mr. Lomax said that, through the Ad Council, the United Negro College Fund benefited from $50-million in contributed advertising last year. About 300,000 donors provided it with enough money to award $80-million in scholarships to about 3,000 students. —Peter Schmidt

Comments

1. I disagree with just showing the initials. It reminds me of Unicef. I liked the whole name printed. I do agree with making the logo a more prominent part. PS-I’m white – the use of the word Negro does not offend me.

   — Dorianne Deto    Jan 17, 04:41 PM    #

2. When you have built as much “equity” in recognition of a marketing phrase as they have, not using it would be silly. This is a smart move…although now it will take a long time for them to get people to recognize the acronym.

   — Al    Jan 17, 07:08 PM    #

3. “Negro” is an archaic word that has a lot of cultural freight. Whether it offends or does not offend a white person (see comment 1) does not matter so much as whether people who read the name are able to historicize the word as part of a trajectory of names for African Americans. I’m sorry, but “Negro” has fallen out of the lexicon of the day. It offends a lot of black people and has been used pejoratively. The initials represent this shift. Furthermore, UNICEF and UNCF are very different; that’s like saying NCAA and NAACP are similar. Get some glasses.

   — Nixon    Jan 17, 09:10 PM    #

4. Obviously, Britchky (and delete the two consonants “r” and “k,” which is indeed bloody likely) you need more sleep instead of writing useless meditations at 4:40 AM. “The Fund” or “The College Fund” would negate the demographic in question, Dawg, so that would be a downright silly option—unless you are a TROLL. BTW, why don’t you come down to NC and we’ll tell you the meaning of “wasted”?

   — Nixon    Jan 18, 07:30 AM    #

5. I’d like to know exactly how much Ad Council money was spent (wasted) on four years of advertising research. And I’m certainly no English scholar, but I believe that the logo is gramatically incorrect.

   — Joseph Spretnjak    Jan 18, 09:20 AM    #

6. From one side of the country USA north, south, east, west – what in the world do “Negroes” want to be called?

   — Dorianne Deto    Jan 18, 10:04 AM    #

7. Wow. It amazes me how a conversation can begin so positively, and suddenly denigrate to these last few comments.

   — Williams    Jan 18, 10:24 AM    #

8. You are right Williams my boy. How dare anyone sacrifice political correctness for the sake of the truth. Shame on me.
   I did find it interesting however, that you chose to use the word “denigrate.”

   — Joseph Spretnjak    Jan 18, 10:48 AM    #

9. Williams displayed the difficulty in identification using words in lieu of symbols. “Denigrate” was probably used when “degenerate” was meant. Perhaps the UNCF needs to further revise the logo to a recognizable silhouette of a person of color holding the torch? We have become so inured to accepting political “correctness” that honest communication has been eliminated.

   — Sue Butler    Jan 18, 11:01 AM    #

10. has no one noticed that the flames indicate the torch (and the torch bearer) are moving to the RIGHT? Coincidence? I think not!

    — John    Jan 18, 11:20 AM    #

11. I am sure the descendants of Africans living in America would like to be called human beings and not the Spanish word for black. Whatever the logo, your tax deductible donation goes to a worthy cause.

    — English Faculty    Jan 18, 01:50 PM    #

12. I got a good laugh at some of these posts. It is refreshing to know that we can talk about important issues (in this case a logo), while still maintaining a modicum of respect. That said, I think all organizations should review their relevance and presence in the public sphere now that we are in the 21st century. A logo change will not diminish the important work of the United Negro College Fund. Focusing on that is missing the forest for the trees.

    — Marie Nubia-Feliciano, M.S.    Jan 18, 02:53 PM    #

13. “Can we all just get along?”

    — TAnthony    Jan 18, 04:00 PM    #

14. I’m not really keen on acronyms. Just think, for example, of how it would appear if the following college decided to identify itself with the obvious acronym: Sam Houston Institute of Technology. Give me an “S” . . .

    — Phil Schwartz    Jan 23, 03:02 PM    #

Previous: Jury Finds U. of Phoenix Parent Company Liable for $280-Million
Next: Students Not So Self-Obsessed After All, Study Finds