The war on terror gets ugly, Part 2
Last week I made fun of the CIA for its terrible anti-terror graphic. And rightfully so. However, in the interests of fairness, let me say that the pro-terror groups aren’t going to win any design competitions either.
Al Qaeda generally uses two symbols … a badge and a flag.
The badge has all the key brand qualities in it — death, God, the Holy Book and a finger in the universal symbol of “we’re #1” — BUT it is way, way too busy. Graphic clean up on aisle 666, please.
The flag.
Qaeda’s flag really has nothing that makes it distinctive. This could be any Arabic phrase on a black background. For all I know this is an ad for a McDonald’s in Baghdad. If you’re a multi-national — of any sort — your logos have to be easily identifiable to foreigners or the illiterate (or, in my case, foreigners who are illiterate).
Compare Qaeda’s badge and flag with the logo of the United Liberation Front of Asom:
Like the Al Qaeda symbols, the ULFA logo also contains text in a language that is totally unknown to me but the overall effect is clear and easily recognized from a distance. (Image via IronicSans which has a great article on trends in the logos of terrorist organizations) It’s clean and the use of the crossed doa gives it a visual hook that an ignoramus like myself can quickly recognize. Remember, while its important for your emblems to appeal to your base, it also has to be easily ID’d by outsiders. It’s not just enough to kill people and destroy things, you’ve got to market it!
Collateral Damage 