i remember going through rural peru many years ago, and walls of buildings everywhere were plastered with candidates logos on bright, solid background colours - and infrastructure like bridges and stuff were all painted in the colour of whichever president/party built it so that people would know that they had funded it. i think the reasoning was that literacy was pretty low but political engagement was actually pretty high. in that situation, a pencil logo sends a pretty clear message to rural voters, whereas a circle with a k is pretty dismissive
i remember going through rural peru many years ago, and walls of buildings everywhere were plastered with candidates logos on bright, solid background colours - and infrastructure like bridges and stuff were all painted in the colour of whichever president/party built it so that people would know that they had funded it. i think the reasoning was that literacy was pretty low but political engagement was actually pretty high. in that situation, a pencil logo sends a pretty clear message to rural voters, whereas a circle with a k is pretty dismissive
Color coded public works is a neat idea actually.
High Schools in my neighborhood were named "Clements", "Dulles", and "Bush".
The big intercontinental airport was also "Bush". We've got a bunch of local public buildings named after notable figures.
Then there's the hold-over shit from the 1920s, when segregation went into high gear.
Like... yeah, we already do this. But a lot of what we advertise is just a parade of assholes.
I can just feel them looking down on me.
Strange things are afoot at the circle k