Across Instagram, Fizz, Reddit, and even LinkedIn, UR students (and alumni) have been sharing their thoughts on the University’s new logo — and reviews haven’t exactly been charitable. One top comment on the University’s Instagram came from Isabella Kelly ’24, who commented: “:( Come on guys, modern logos aren’t the slightest bit sophisticated. Where is the knowledge and craftsmanship of the old logo??”
On a post on the r/Rochester subreddit on the rebrand, the top comment as of Oct. 19 reads: “It looks like one of those colleges you see advertised on tabloid websites that accept anyone with a pulse.”
Even LinkedIn, in its own corporate-speaking way, is full of verbose vehemence from alumni like Reagan McNameeKing ’16E ’20S, who politely pointed out that “This new visual identity does not achieve the stated goals of communicating the brand strategy pillars and brand personality.”
An online petition is even circulating, asking the University to “Remove the new minimalist seal” from official branding. As of writing, this petition has more than 1,200 signatures.
But the internet is prone to broadcasting only the loudest voices. To get a fuller picture of what students actually think, I went to their natural habitat: the libraries. I talked to roughly 52 students across Gleason, iZone, Q&i, the Art and Music Library, Studio X, Carlson, Wilson Commons, and Rettner — undergraduate and graduate students; local and international; from Eastman, URMC, and the River Campus alike. They had their differences, but they all agreed on one thing: the new logo sucks.
The General Impression
First impressions were roughly the same from all students. “It just feels lackluster,” sophomore Hali’a Serna said. “It feels empty.” Some students were more blunt: “I haven’t talked to anyone who likes [the new logo],” said senior George Nicks, continuing, “If you get anything from this interview: Bad. They did a bad job.” Sydney Prescott, a first-year PhD student in the chemistry program, thinks that the new logo is worse. “I think it’s easier to print on things, but it’s uglier.” Senior Talia Crook said that “It feels very startup.” Senior and Eastman dual-degree student Nadia Magalski shared that “When someone showed me the photo — to be 100% honest with you — the first time I saw it, I thought it was a joke.”
Lack of History
Many students felt that the new logo, with its sans-serif “Meliora” text and simplified lineart icons, didn’t cohere with the University’s nearly 200-year history.
Senior Tziporah Braun put it this way: “I feel like I can see where they were going with [the new logo]; It’s like minimalistic, classy, modern, whatever. But … the way I view universities is [as] these steady old places where you come to learn and gain knowledge. It’s not really where I would go modern.”
Braun also noted that they cut the year of the school’s founding, 1850, out of the new logo. “The idea of the 1850 is like ‘Established 1850’… But now it’s like not there. I feel like [the new logo] could be [for] some tech school that opened up five years ago.”
Most other students had similar thoughts. In a conversation I had with sophomore Sarah Fortin and first-year Amy Taylor, Fortin stated, “I think they were trying to be more minimalist with the new logo,” to which Taylor added, “I feel like it’s kind of disproportionate to the vibe of campus.”
Senior Liv Ilasz said this: “I like the old logo because it makes me feel like I’m part of an institution that has been here for so long and has this history behind it. And I think the new logo does not embody that. It feels very soulless.”
Campus Personality
Many students were also upset that the new logo did not accurately reflect the vibrancy of UR’s campus and student population. Senior and graphic design TA Bug Cartwright was particularly upset by the logo for this reason. “When you have a [school] logo … you want it to match what the location you’re in feels like and I think that — you know — a lot of the freshman dorms still have asbestos in them,” Cartwright said. “And so [a logo change] really doesn’t feel like it’s what we need to focus on. Maybe if I was in a place where all the dorms … were all clean, sparkling, and shining, then maybe [the new logo] would make sense.”
Cartwright did, however, later admit the new logo wasn’t completely off the mark in how it represents the University. “[UR has] a reputation of being soul-sucking or just sucking a lot of money away from the community,” they noted before adding, with a laugh, that “this is a very soul-sucking logo, so [the branding team] correctly conveyed that [message].”
Many students were also upset with how the logo change impacted school spirit. Sophomore Caroline Kelly stated that “The school colors [in the old logo] showed Rochester and made it unique to Rochester … If I saw the new one, I wouldn’t think ‘Rochester’ immediately. I’d have to second guess.”
Sophomore Reese Donnelly commented that “I like the feeling of a more classical college logo. Something that feels less new because it makes me feel more pride in my university. [The new logo] doesn’t make me feel pride.”
Lack of Student Involvement
Almost every student I spoke to had not been aware of the University’s decision to change the logo until they saw posts announcing the new logo’s release on Instagram or LinkedIn.
Sophomore Grace Culligan felt that the designers didn’t really value student input. “I didn’t hear about [plans to change the logo] until it was announced. I wish they would have done what you were describing earlier, like, putting it on the walls for people to talk about.” Culligan was referencing the 2007 redesign process and its focus on student involvement. “It just seems like they didn’t care about the larger student opinion.”
Junior Spencer Ahn, when asked if he thought that the designers valued student input, said this: “I don’t know if they involved students. I’m going to assume they didn’t, because I didn’t hear about it. So I would say no, probably not, if they didn’t really ask us.”
In an interview with CT, Director of Brand Marketing Nancy Zawacki stated that “there were probably about 4,500 people who were a part of [audience testing] including four rounds with students.”
This was news to most of the people I talked to.
Senior Talia Crook was skeptical of the University’s messaging that students were consulted in the redesign process. “They also keep talking about, ‘Oh yeah, we asked everybody!’ but they didn’t ask nobody’s opinion.”
Optics
Many students were also concerned with how the rebrand would make the University — and by extension themselves — look.
“[The University] had a whole committee to do this and spent three years’ worth of funding to fund this committee,” Crook commented. “And yet there’s budget cuts in departments that could use that money.”
At this time the total cost of the rebranding campaign is not public.
Other students were concerned about what impression the new logo gives regarding the prestige (or lack thereof) of our institution. “You look at it, it feels like it’s an online university,” first-year Nova Leuchtmann said.
Nadia Magalski had similar thoughts, wondering, “Is there some universe in which we’re pushing towards an online platform?”
First-year Aashray Aggarwal claimed that “I don’t think many of my friends would ever want to apply to U of R again — the ones who were considering — just because of the marketing.”
Others still expressed apprehension that the new logo would make it harder for them to be taken seriously as job candidates or when seeking further education. “I saw the list of college rankings had come out,” senior Mia Strassman said. “U.S. News posted it two weeks [ago]. So I was like, ‘Damn, we really went down again.’ And then I saw the logo, and I’m like, ‘Damn. Oh, I hope this doesn’t affect that [next year].’”
Outlier Opinions
Although most felt strong dislike for the new logo, a few students had more nuanced views. Senior Sam Lorenzetti, for example, initially appeared to be very critical of the new logo but later conceded that “At the end of the day, honestly, is it that big of a deal? I don’t really care.”
“I just like to reserve the right to complain about things,” Lorenzetti added with a chuckle.
First-year graduate student Christophe Boivin felt similarly: “I’ll probably just end up getting more used to the new one as opposed to being sentimental about the old one. But I still think the old one is better.”
The Seal
There was one aspect of the rebranding that students liked: the updated University seal. This is the first time the seal has been significantly updated in almost 100 years.
“I think it’s really good,” senior George Nicks said. “I think it’s a good redesign. I think it looks cleaner.”
“I’m gonna be honest, I kind of like the new seal,” graduate student TJ Weaver said. “The new seal is cool.”
“I think the double lining in the seal just makes it feel similar to [the 2007 logo],”
Amy Taylor said. “It’s way more minimalist, the logo, than the seal.”
“If the inside of the seal was the actual new logo, I don’t think I would be as distraught about it,” senior Ashlie Sitzer noted.
However, not everyone was a fan. A few students felt that the seal was not “supposed” to change. To sophomore Reese Donnelly, updating the seal “feels like erasing history.”
Closing Thoughts
Last weekend I spoke to Dean of Students Anne-Marie Algier regarding an upcoming piece telling the story of the 2007 logo’s redesign process. “What strikes me — that I like, especially — when I hear or read student comments — is that I don’t care if they’re positive or negative,” Algier said. To Algier, just hearing a strong response is a good thing. “It tells me that they care. That they’re passionate. That means that they want the University to be something that they’re proud of and they want their voice to be included in that.”
Overall, students are certainly passionate about the new logo for a variety of reasons including an abandonment of campus values, the presumably large price tag, and a lack of student involvement. Every single person I talked to expressed a desire to change the logo back. Unfortunately, according to graduate student Lucy Lingerberg, the chances of a reversion are slim.
“I did my undergrad at Dartmouth right as they were changing the logo, and I have very strong opinions on that. I do not know why they did it. It looks so much worse.” As she opened up about the experience, Lingerberg sounded resigned. “There’s nothing you can do about it. [There] was a huge petition and 5,000 people signed or whatever.” She contemplated and glanced at the new UR logo again. “They’re not gonna change anything.”
