Have you heard of the recent Gap logo saga? The original navy boxed Gap imagery had been pulled from the website in place of a newer more modern logo when the company was hit with a backlash. Whether you agree or not, Gap have rescinded their rebrand plans and are going back to their old Gap imagery.

I would like to think that the decision makers at Gap are smart enough to only move forward with a change in imagery after some careful consideration and with the help of supporting research, but who can tell? The reversal did provide the company with a great deal of publicity this week that they wouldn’t have received otherwise and it demonstrated that many of their customers are still passionate about their brand.

Whether you agree or not with their change in direction, the company is being very quick to respond to criticisms and as the Twitter account shows, (I can’t tell if it’s an official Twitter response or the clever and quick workings of a fan) they are certainly laughing at themselves.

The press release issued by Gap Inc. acknowledges that the company neglected to consult their passionate online community and says that moving forward it will engage with the audience before making future rebranding decisions.

Based on the MTD approach, whether the new logo was created internally or externally, the decision did not consider customer relationships and customer perception, some of the very important branding considerations. How has this move alienated or supported their brand champions?

The decision by Gap to revert back to their old logo also demonstrates that internally the company must not have been fully committed to this change. When companies and organisations rebrand there will always be bloggers that respond negatively but rarely do such large companies like Gap release new imagery only to then revoke it due to customer feedback.

The release and revoke of the new imagery have sparked some entertaining Twitter conversation, although it is difficult to tell whether it is coming officially from Gap or from clever and interested fans.

Here’s a snapshot of the humour:

I wonder why Gap decided to change the imagery in the first place?

In addition to being humorous, Gap’s (potential) use of the light-hearted Twitter as a PR tool is very clever, if they in fact came up with it. Perhaps they should move some people from communications into research!

This amusing re-imagining of the new Pepsi logo just highlights the positive and negative effects of the digital age on brands. Today, anyone can take a company’s brand, mess around with it and redistribute it in a instant.

When people embrace a brand and make it their own, that can be a good thing. However, not everyone is that loving as the image above brilliantly demonstrates. Pepsi may be getting viral exposure, but not the kind they really want.

That’s why brands need to be aware and seek to influence where they can. If the kids are skate boarding on your car, why not build them a ramp to keep them occupied?