From my inbox today:

‘Your unborn baby on your iPhone

Proud dads-to-be can now carry moving 4D baby scans of their unborn child everywhere they go on their iPhone or video iPod.

4D pregnancy scanning service Cocoon4D in central London has the technology to download images from 4D scans onto the portable devices for parents to view whenever and wherever they want.

Images from the 4D scan are professionally edited by former TV director and co-founder of Cocoon4D Peter Demetris and can then be downloaded to an iPhone or video iPod as a secure download from the Cocoon4D website. The parents can be provided with a DVD of the edited images if they prefer.

Peter Demetris said: “We are constantly seeking exciting ways to deliver 4D scans for patients. The idea came when I downloaded the scan of my son onto my own phone. Friends were amazed when I showed it to them, so it seemed like the next logical step.”’

Amazed? Really? Or just too polite to tell you what they really thought?

Just me?

The debate over the 2012 Olympics logo rumbles on, and try as I might, I can’t help but side with the critics, of which there are many.

I’ve read and digested Coudal’s lengthy and well argued defence, and even agree with many of the points it makes. But it doesn’t make me like it any more. According to Chris, this makes me a ‘fuckwit who knows nothing about design’. I can live with that. 99.9% of the world’s population know nothing about design, so I’m in good company.

I know nothing about chocolate, beer, or the process of making music, except what I like and don’t like. Why should design be any different?

It’s irrelevant whether the logo is technically well-designed or not. What matters, as with all brands, is the emotional response it elicits, and the emotional response to the 2012 logo has been almost entirely negative. Yes, some of that can be put down to the cynicism that seems to accompany anything Olympics-related, but most of it is down to the fact that Joe Public just doesn’t like it. And that’s a problem. It’s a problem because the logo was paid for with public money and it’s a problem because what this Olympics needs more than anything else is public support.

The massive under-estimation of the cost of the whole exercise, the fact that it’s London-based, and the deep suspicion that accompanies anything so closely related to Tony Blair have all undermined efforts to get the Great British Public behind the 2012 Games. The logo was a chance to redress the balance, to give the masses something with which we could identify. That chance has been lost.

It may be that given time we’ll come to like the pink and yellow spiky thing, but what kind of brand manager wants to go around telling potential customers that if they only give themselves time to get used to it they will eventually come to identify and love the brand?

To me, the reaction to the 2012 logo is reminiscent of the reaction to British Airways decision to move away from the red, white and blue colour scheme on the tails of its planes, in favour of designs which represented the flags of different countries. It was well-intentioned, well-executed, but very poorly received. Whatever the reason behind the response in that case, it damaged the brand and BA was forced to revert back to a more ‘traditional’ design. The 2012 organisers may not have that option, for them it is already too late.