In our first post for the new year, I'd like to bring to your attention a little thing that Duane Reade is doing to NYers. If you're not familiar with Duane Reade, it is a local pharmacy chain here in NYC in the same vain as CVS, Walgreens or Rite Aid. First of all let me say this, because I haven't said it before on Word Vomit, but Duane Reade sucks balls for their new hideous designs. They're logo is wretched and the new color palettes they've introduced makes me want to urinate on the Pantone color book that was given to their graphic designer(s).

With that being said, not only have they introduced pastels of doom, they had the nerve to re-do their Spending Rewards Program. This was the only shining thing about the store. In these uncertain economic times, us NYers have come to rely on DR's rewards system. For every dollar you spend, 1 point is given. For every 100 points you get a, $5 coupon is issued. This was good. Those things came in handy, because you could get about $10 every month or so from DR, if you spent enough and sometimes you could. We've come to rely on them. It was a nice gift. Clearly, they saw this and decided to ruin it. So to pay for their expesnive and sucky store remodeling and to pay those awful graphic designers who changed their look, they had to go say fuck you NY and then proceeded to rape us in the face.

They had a mandatory change to the new RewardsFlex program. So this is how it goes now:

For every dollar you spend, 2 points are given. Pretty cool.

For every 500 points you get, $5 coupon is given out to you. Wait what the fuck?!

I roughly had to spend $100 to get $5 back. Now I have to spend $500 to get $5 back? Are you fucking kidding me? I have to spend $500 in Duane Reade? Best Buy doesn't even have the balls to do that and they sell fucking tvs and other shit!

For once I am utterly appalled by this and I wanted to channel my Jewish brethren and write a stern letter of disapproval and vow never to shop in their store again, but then I said to myself, where the hell will I shop at 1:OOAM when I need something? Fuck. Trapped like mice in a cage. Sneaky bastards. They've cornered me with this horrible points system. Do you know how long you could go before you'd spend $500 in Duane Reade? You could go months before you saw a $5 coupon. I'd rather not use it now.

Thanks very, much Duane Reade. I've never willing gotten raped in the face before until now and I've got to tell you -- if you're gonna be raping people in the face like this was Ozwald Penitentiary at least have the decency to have Christopher Meloni around. Fuckers.

This is a truly amazing piece from this year's FAME Festival.

Shocking, huh?

I should preface this by saying: I am an American. I am also a New Yorker. I was here. I get it.

That said: I am also a graphic designer.

I've read a bunch of the comments (read: angry rants) about this ad - some of them just plain stupid and some with intelligent thought. I'm going to come right out and say it: I don't find it offensive or to be in poor taste.

Advertising and design are supposed to be shocking, thought provoking, and inciting. If you're not moved to some sort of reaction, then the designer didn't do their job.

Is it a touchy subject? Of course it is. Should we then avoid it at all costs because it might envoke a heated response? No. Absolutely not.

I think a lot of the issue people are having with the ad is actually in the tagline, which is this:

The focus isn't really September 11th, but the power of nature and our planet. People have argued that the ad should have focused on something like Global Warming and not the Tsunami, because, like 9/11, that would be an issue caused by man. I can understand that argument, but I also wonder if maybe they're missing the point.

The way I interpreted this tag was as making more of a statement on the power of nature versus the power of man. Yes, 9/11 was cause by man and most likely 100% preventable - not so much the case with a tsunami, however, I'm also of the belief that a good 70-80% of the things wrong with our planet are also being cause by man and probably in the same percentile for having been preventable (note: they're mostly no longer preventable - I do not believe anything or anyone can "save the planet" at this point, but at some point, they would have been), so the message I took from this was more along the lines of that old saying about a woman scorned - hell hath no fury like that of Mother Nature. If we don't respect and preserve the planet, she'll kill us - pure and simple - and nature has a greater extendible fist than mankind. We can only wipe out but a few, whereas she can take us all in one shot. Somehow, in this context, the ad makes sense to me - but maybe that's just me.

If the intent was to emphasize preventable tragedies, then yes, the written message could have been stronger - perhaps focusing on climate control or something that does have a direct link to our impact on the planet, rather than on the Tsunami (though there have been studies done on how human beings do impact the shifting of tectonic plates, none of the theories have been 100% conclusive).

The image itself is actually very well done - it's shocking, upsetting, provacative - pretty much things you'd want from an ad like this. It isn't glorifying a tragedy or saying September 11th wasn't horrible - it's saying that was horrible, and so is this.

I don't know. Maybe I've seen enough startling imagery in my career to make me immune to these things - or to have caused me to look at them from a rational perspective rather than emotional. I realize that analyzing as a designer is far different from doing so as a non-designer. That's not to say it doesn't bring out an emotional response from me, it does, but it's definitely not one of disgust and outrage towards those who created the piece.

FYI - the WWF has condemned the ad, saying they were unaware of its creation and publication, and rejected the concept entirely. The company responsible for the ad, the Brazilian subsidiary of DDB, has also issued an apology, stating that the ad never should have run to begin with.

It has also been revealed that there was a commercial created to accompany the ad, though it has since been pulled from YouTube and anyplace online we it may have been viewed. The print ad did win an award for public service from One Club, however, it has since been pulled from the site and no response has been given yet for why it was chosen.

I'm curious - what are your thoughts on the topic?

I guess they subscribe to the idea of subtlety being overrated.

Or maybe we're just a band of perverts. You tell us - what does this ad make YOU think of?

Now, I am a type fanatic, but I'm going to have to admit: I knew it was a face intended for screen purposes, but I hadn't realized that Verdana had become such a blight on design society. Sure, we know about Papyus (boo, hiss) and Comic Sans (screeeeeeeeeeeee), but Verdana? Causing this kind of hatred, outrage, uproar and even the creation of one of those dreaded and all-powerful Let's All Join this Group 'Cause My Friends Did and It Might Make Me Look Cool Facebook Group? Really?

Okay, sure, it's not the most strategic branding move:

The company has its own brand typeface that's served them well for decades, so swapping for something so generic is a bit bizarre. I'm sure that they have enough in their budget to have commissioned the creation of an updated character set - though, apparently, their decision was heavily impacted by their desire to be able to use the same typeface both in print and on the web. I'll say it again though - their branding has served them quite well for decades, so why they felt the need to make this change now is a bit strange. There are ways around non-web friendly type - and most branded companies aren't using those faces for every aspect of their brand - just the big stuff, you know?

Additionally... it looks like crap. Listen, I don't mind Verdana on screen... but in print? Well... here's a side-by-side comparison of their 2009 and 2010 catalogues (click the photo for a larger version and article):

The old standard just... comes together a bit better than the new. Verdana is one of those simpler fonts, you know? Kind of like that one friend in the group... the one you think is very nice, but who you're sure is also mildly retarded? Kind of like that. It means well, but there are just certain things it cannot do - for example: be used in print.

All of that said... I still don't get why it's sparking such massive anger and disgust. I mean, with some of the reactions I've read, you'd think IKEA had decided to start using Papyrus on everything. Imagine that, people. It could be much worse.

Also... it's IKEA. I mean... does that really impact your day to day that much? Are you subbing ikea.com for your daily porno fix? Are you going to tear all your hair out and kill the mailman in a fit of rage when the catalogue comes? Or spontaneously vomit every time you enter one of their stores? There have been much more unfortunate design foibles in recent branding history (Duane Reade's rebranding comes to mind, as does the Tropicana packaging fiasco). I suppose, if Tropicana is any indication, anything can happen - maybe the Facebook flock will swoop in and restore Ikea Sans to its rightful place in the stack of catalogues you keep by the toilet. Honestly, though, why not just go do your shopping and choke back the vom - this one's really not worth the clean up on aisle five.

Where were these signs when I used to live at home.  Whenever I needed some alone time it was either my brother or my mom slamming on the door. This would have been a great way to let them know.

This was a piece from a poster designed by Olly Moss. (U.K. Graphic Designer)  Website

His poster design is so cleverly illustrated and thought out. You'll definitely enjoy it.

This is the greatest idea the internet has ever produced.