Cover Coincidence?

My wife and I just returned home after a two week cross-country vacation (more on that another time) and that means yesterday we got to enjoy the thrill of picking up all our held mail at the post office. It really was kind of a thrill to search for the items worth saving amidst all the catalogs, bills, and junk mail: a couple checks, magazines, some bank statements.

But it was one of the magazines that made me pause. I subscribe to Esquire, and received the August issue amidst this new pile. As soon as I saw the cover photo, my first thought was, "hang on a sec, don't I already have this issue?" Here's what the cover looks like:

Then I realized where I'd seen this image before. I also subscribe to Wired magazine, and had just received their July issue before we left for our trip. Here's what that cover looks like:

Very much the same, huh? Not just the camera's low angle, but also the dark suit, the left-shoulder-forward pose, and the soft highlight halo in the background. They look like they were taken the same day by the same person. Could it be?

Turns out, yes, they are taken by the same photographer, and the name is Platon. I looked him up and he's actually done quite a few covers for Esquire in the past, with a similar portrait style. You can check out his website (www.platonphoto.com), which includes his bio and portfolio.

Now, I'm sure this isn't the first time something like this has happened. Certainly, the magazines have different publishers (Esquire = Hearst, Wired = Condé Nast), so you can't blame it on internal miscommunication. And the issues technically have publication dates a month apart. But go to your local newsstand, and I bet you'll see both of these issues currently on the rack. I wonder if this kind of thing really bugs the magazines' editors? Or does it happen more then I've realized?

I might be the only guy who was confused by this, but I hope I'm not the only one who's enjoying it...

Brava Italia!

I'm not Italian, but I've loved watching the Italian team this year, and I am so thrilled with yesterday's final. So disappointed in Zidane going out that way, but good to see that France was useless without him.

Brava Italia! See you again in 2008!

Goodbye KFC Colonel... Hello Generic Old Guy

So I came across this article in The Courier-Journal of Louisville, Kentucky, about the new updated Colonel that has been created for KFC. To quote to the article, "The new Colonel is younger, better defined, a video-age celebrity chef. And he doesn't have to share his space with the letters KFC. He's meant to represent Kentucky Fried Chicken again. His new look is less like your grandfather and more like your cousin."

Do they really believe that's what they've done? Here, take a look for yourself....

This is the OLD (Current) Colonel:




and here's the NEW "younger, better defined" Colonel:



Is it just me, or have they basically elimenated everything that made this guy real? The new image reminds me of what they did to Betty Crocker in the 1990's. Younger, smoother, less detail. Why do we continue to do this to brand icons? It seems so safe to "young it up," when there is just as much potential for strong identity in embracing the details that make something unique.

Instead, this new icon seems to get rid of any definition of character in the man's face, and the result is a generic old guy that looks less like the actual man it was based on and more like any number of people who both patronize and/or work at KFC.

Notice that addition of a KFC apron? I think that small addition is what really ruins the entire image. Why? Because now the Colonel doesn't look like the founder/host of a family restaurant chain, but more like just one of the thousands of senior aged employees that have had to get jobs at their local KFC because their pensions or Social Security checks aren't enough to keep ends meet. It's no longer a welcoming image, but a depressing one.

Now I'll admit, I don't eat at KFC all that much, but when I've had a craving for it, I've always been happy to know it was there. In fact, I would think they could do more to improve their brand if they followed the lead of the other major fast food markets and started promoting healthier menu options and focused more on the product.

Make the Colonel stand for something of quality and that will stick with me. A revamped brand icon means nothing unless it translates into the product, and I don't see that happening here at all.

If anything, they've distanced me as a customer by further distorting something I used to be able to rely on. Make the Colonel the Colonel again. Put his photo on a T shirt with a retro logo theme, and I just might go to your restaurant just for the shirt. And once I got in there, I'd catch the scent of your delicious food, and combine that with the old-fashioned, original uniqueness of the brand in my mind, and start returning to KFC a whole lot more.

"Personal watercraft, ice skates, wine, and office furniture."

What do those things have in common? Nothing. But they were all in the same episode of "How It's Made" tonight on the Science Channel. And that's part of what makes this show so great

Do have one of those TV shows that, once you flip past it, it's hard to stop watching? Even though you might have something else you should be doing? Even though the show has no plot, even though you already saw this episode? Well, is one of those shows for me.

Okay, I'm a bit of a geek. I like knowing how things work and I have a fascination with mechanical engineering, so this behind-the-scenes show is like candy in many ways. I like learning something new.