Good on the BBC for publishing some tongue in cheek alternatives to the guff wot is our official 2012 logo.

I think they must have farmed the official logo design out to one of our esteemed Euro counterparts, who have royally messed up any chance of us being taken seriously.

Is it just me, or does the original look more like Maggie giving a bj than Lisa. Or is that too paedaphilic to contemplate?

That crappy logo wouldn't look out of place on a bedroom wall in a John Hughes film.

I'd love to see the itemised invoice for that one. Well done Wolff Olins for going for gold in the padded expenses section.

Maybe I just have a twisted mind, but the official logo looks to be saying alot:

"

SH

IT

"

I really am in the wrong line of work.

The character of Lisa Simpson is 8 years old.

Why does everyone seem to think it's OK for someone to liken any image to a child performing a sex act?

It doesn't even look anything like Lisa - her hair has triangular spikes all over, it's not shaped like the zero on the logo at all.

Whether you like the logo or not, if your mind sees child pornography in it, then you need professional help.

But, then again, you're probably an avid fan of "anime" or Russian preteen "models" as well...

Do you think, "That design's a bit Wolff Olins" will enter the language as shorthand for over-priced, dodgy branding?

Squint your eyes and look carefully at the logo. Does it spell something out? A four letter word possibly? Something to do with defacation, or possibly a statement on the state of the Olympics? :-)

Seems the latest twist is it can cause epilepsy when screened on TV... oh dear. What a nice waste of cash. Let it continue at this rate and Gov.Uk will be broke before 2010! Now why did I leave England I wonder...

though some of the other logos are no better than the real one, i do have to say that number 8 on the second bbc gallery would actually be worth £400,000

rather phallic imagery, number 8.

Really, I dont mind it, or probably to be more accurate, I don't really care.

Probably just me but what is that Olympics figure doing to the London figure? Very modern/enlightened but a bit inappropriate given a key target audience?

"Why does everyone seem to think it's OK for someone to liken any image to a child performing a sex act?"

It is what it is.

Don't ask us why it looks like that - ask Wolff Olins.

I'm going back to my "anime".

I feel a bit sorry for Seb and "SpearChucker" Tessa they have been hanging out with Medja folk for too long and have forgotten there English.

Here is some help Seb says in PR "London 2012 will be 'Everyone's Games', everyone's 2012. This is the vision at the very heart of our brand. It will define the venues we build and the Games we hold and act as a reminder of our promise to use the Olympic spirit to inspire everyone and reach out to young people around the world. It is an invitation to take part and be involved."

without realising that in real English this means "Why dont you peasants keep quite and let us tell you what you want".

Also the poor delulded spokesperson who said in fluent PR: " the olympics will be in a new era " -- is this a gentle hint about the stadiums completion date say in two Wemblys time.

Technically, as she was 8 it 1989 when it started, she'd be about 26 by now. She just doesn't want to look older.

Hi, my name is anonymous coward, and I posted the angry Lisa Simpson comment. I have lost my sense of humour - has anyone seen it? Also, I only have those pictures of Russian models (I have no idea why I put quotation marks on them earlier - almost as if model wasn't a real word!) on my PC for research. I also don't seem to know much about MANGA (or anime - this time I got the quotation marks technically correct) to be able to distinguish between the many sub-genres, of which only some are a bit dodgy.

In short, I'm a tool, I'm a tool, I'm a big annoying tool, and I'm sorry for inflicting myself upon you all.

Signed,

The Anonymous Troll.

http://img.metro.co.uk/i/pix/pa/2007/06/pa51695_175x175.jpg

The odd thing is that the London 2012 logo spells Zion...Most curious.

I don't understand why they are trying to make the London Olympics into a brand. Why does everything have to be a brand? Why not just the taking part and the sense of uniting the world?

This just proves the Olympics are just money making schemes now, there for profit and no longer for the joy of representing your nation.

OK so I couldn’t help but join in - and Freud would have a field day with me no doubt - but when I saw the new 2012 logo - this is what I saw. (sorry *grin*) http://www.beyondmetrix.com/olympics2012.gif

(may not be suitable for work/prudes/those with a sense of humour bypass)

Was thinking of getting some T-shirts printed hahaha

Cant believe ANYONE signed the official logo off - its more like the emperors new clothes. And as for the flashing images at launch - how embarrassing that this is the "best of British".

Personally I love the logo of the British Olympic Association http://www.olympics.org.uk/home2.aspx Its stylish and relevant and scales well in varied situations ( the sign of a good logo I always thought). In comparison, the 2012 logo when scaled down alongside looks even more crap and non descript than it did before.

Samantha Mignano

(cross posted to UK marketing - apologies if you get it twice - or don’t "get" it at all) ;-)

Beyond Metrix Ltd

www.beyondmetrix.com

They should have used the image of a white elephant, eating money, being ridden by a junket (the collective noun) of IOC officials.

although I suspect Neu Labor has that one TM'd

http://www.scilt.stir.ac.uk/images/London20201220Olympics20logo.jpg

£400k on a load of old tosh when they already had the perfect logo.

As the saying goes - if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Yeah, sorry, you're right, I take it all back. Images depicting the sexual exploitation of children are hilarious aren't they?

By legitimising such cartoon images as "jokes" or "art" you're adding a bit of legitimacy to the whole thing.

It's the thin end of a very nasty wedge.

There should be Zero Tolerance of child abuse.

I notice you were brave enough to post anonymously too.

Um, The Simpsons is a CARTOON, it is not real. I was 8 when it started and am 26 now.. if Lisa Simpson was real she would be about my age now.

People commenting on the fact they think the logo looks like Lisa Simpson giving head is in no way related to child abuse. It is scary that you are thinknig that way.

forget all you lot that seem to thinkm you can see blowjobs, n afro men. i see the word SHIT. why is that word there? n what does it resemble? the city we live in is shit? n to make a logpo out o it. i do rate it but i dont see noone else has picked up on it!

Emma. You're wrong.

By your logic, child abuse images are ok if the victim is now old enough, regardless of how old they were at the time.

How can relating an image to one of an 8 year old performing a sex act NOT be related to child abuse?

Cartoon, artistic and computer generated representations of abusive activities are being used to try and circumvent the law regarding such things. Just because these graphic images are not of real people does not make them acceptable.