Yesterday ConservativeHome published a picture of the likely new Tory logo - a picture taken by a camera phone. The scoop is picked up in most of this morning's newspapers:
The Telegraph: "The torch logo is being ditched by Mr Cameron because of its association with the party's Thatcherite past. Party officials hope that a new logo will demonstrate Mr Cameron's modernising approach." Acknowledgment rating 5/5 - Although ConservativeHome is described as "a party website" there's a full credit and a hyperlink.
The Independent: "There are risks about presenting the Conservatives as the party of the "tree". It may prove difficult for Mr Cameron to live up to the green image. He launched his leadership by riding a bicycle to work at the Commons. But this week he admitted he only rode to Westminster once a week. He has resorted to the chauffeur-driven limousine because he has so many papers to read." Acknowledgment rating 4/5 - Two mentions including the full ConservativeHome.com URL.
The Times: "The blue-and-green design is the favourite to replace the Tory torch, introduced by Margaret Thatcher in 1987 to symbolise liberty, pride, and unity.... Lord Bell of Belgravia, the advertising guru who masterminded the three Thatcher election victories, was not impressed by the concept. He said: “Remember the old saying: blue and green should never be seen.” Acknowledgment rating 3/5 - No direct credit but Andrew Pierce quotes ConservativeHome.com in his piece.
Daily Mail: "The design has drawn a scathing response from Tory peer Lord Tebbit, a close ally of former Prime Minister Lady Thatcher, who introduced the torch. He likened the oak to a 'bunch of sprouting broccoli' and said: 'Changing the logo is what companies who haven't got much else to think about tend to do. This is one of those displacement activities because they aren't thinking about policies.'" Acknowledgment rating 2/5 - The online Mail mentions ConservativeHome.com but the newspaper version doesn't and publishes the wrong logo (it publishes ConservativeHome's suggestion - not the one being considered by the party).
The Guardian: "The new oak may prove too English for some tastes, which party insiders say could lead Mr Cameron to create a small copse, including a Scots pine for Scotland. Wales's contribution to the Tory arboretum is as yet uncertain and the few members in Northern Ireland may not get anything at all, not even a shamrock. The party could go further still and opt for a small forest representing the different forces on Mr Cameron's frontbench. Alan Duncan, the trade spokesman, is most certainly a bonsi pine; the ascetic party chairman, Francis Maude, a thorn tree; William Hague has largely been defoliated; and the hand-wringing Oliver Letwin must be a weeping maple. Tory rightwingers would be shown by a large redwood. Mr Cameron himself is of uncertain genus, though he has lush, fast-growing foliage, pleasant stature, lots of flowers and the prospect of early-picking fruit, which probably means he hails from somewhere in the the tropics, or alternatively is a victoria plum." Acknowledgment rating 1/5 - Julian Glover's page 1 story only manages a mention of a "a website for party supporters". (11.30am - Julian has left a comment to say that there was a mention in later editions of The Guardian).
The Sun and Express both mention the logo change. Acknowledgment rating 0/5 - Neither mention ConservativeHome and the Express' Hickey column presents it as 'Hickey can reveal...'.
6.30pm update: BBC Online has a report with a 5/5 acknowledgment rating: "A poll on the ConservativeHome website, which represents the views of the party at grassroots level to its leadership, suggested that 63% of its users supported an oak tree logo. Some of the words and phrases used to explain their backing included that the image was strong, rooted, environmental/green, English/British, protective, reaching to the sky and providing shelter." The Scotsman, in contrast, gets a 0/5 rating for zero acknowledgment: "The change will please modernisers who want to pitch the party as eco-friendly and are eager to get away from its Thatcherite history, which the torch embodies."
What happens if a rival party submits an oak tree as one of its permitted three ballot paper logos to the electoral commission today?
No formal decision has been taken to adopt the logo, so there would be nothing to stop a rival registering its image.
It's tempting for a cheeky rival. ;-)
Posted by: Chad | August 09, 2006 at 09:29
Hmmmm Green sort of blue and really fuzzy, yep got it bang on!
Posted by: arthur | August 09, 2006 at 09:32
I am always confused when new logos are chosen. What I ask are the changers trying to say?
Posted by: betty | August 09, 2006 at 09:33
"What I ask are the changers trying to say?"
...It's my Party & I'll cry if I want to !
Posted by: Alison Anne Smith | August 09, 2006 at 09:51
I found the link to this page from the guardianonline site, so they did credit you guys...
Posted by: Jimmy | August 09, 2006 at 09:52
I hear from a CCO source that its "likely" to go ahead albeit with a survey...pah. If its anything like the survey over membership rates, why bother? You tell us which answers to give anyway!
Posted by: James Maskell | August 09, 2006 at 10:00
Please can we NOT have another day of ranting pensioners demanding that our ancient torch symbol (under which Disraeli defeated Gladstone etc) be retained.
Posted by: Don Jameson | August 09, 2006 at 10:00
The Conservative logo debate to be discussed shortly on Radio 5Live.
Posted by: Jack W | August 09, 2006 at 10:01
I'm 42 but perhaps that's too old for the party now...rant over !!
Posted by: Alison Anne Smith | August 09, 2006 at 10:03
Alison :
I'm widely known over at PoliticalBetting.com as being aged 103 !
Posted by: Jack W | August 09, 2006 at 10:05
Con Home just been given a plug on Radio 5. Described as a right wing blog. Wonder if Labourhome is described as a left wing blog. Maybe something for the BBC platform piece.
Posted by: Andrew Woodman | August 09, 2006 at 10:11
For heavens sake is this blog as obsessed with trivia as the party's leaders? They've got nothing to say except "We agree with Blair on most things [except war and peace which we won't mention] and we want employers to provide showers for cyclists"
The core vote is melting away and that's all they can think of - a tree!
The torch was OK - a good campaigning symbol - and the tree is harmless but at this juncture to get steamed up about the change is pathetic
Posted by: christina speight | August 09, 2006 at 10:12
"Please can we NOT have another day of ranting pensioners demanding that our ancient torch symbol (under which Disraeli defeated Gladstone etc) be retained."
Please can we not have another day of sneering modernisers criticising those who wonder whether this costly exercise will actually make a blind bit of difference except to waste money.
Posted by: Richard | August 09, 2006 at 10:13
An Oak tree is a fantastic new conservative logo, that represents the rural past, and the ecological future.
Posted by: Mark | August 09, 2006 at 10:13
I agree with a comment made on radio 5......it does look like a mushroom cloud.
Posted by: Clark | August 09, 2006 at 10:17
Oh my word !!!!!!!!!!!!!
As 5Live has just pointed out, turned upside down the new logo appears like sperm wending their merry way to target !!
A rethink required me thinks.
Posted by: Jack W | August 09, 2006 at 10:19
Apologies - a mention of conservativehome was cut from the first edition piece in the Guardian when it was edited to fit - but we restored it for later on.
Posted by: Julian Glover | August 09, 2006 at 10:46
Jack W, you must have some rather unusual sperm!
Not something I'd ever have expected to say on ConHome.
Posted by: CDM | August 09, 2006 at 10:58
Unless you're looking at the Daily Mail logo...
Posted by: CDM | August 09, 2006 at 11:00
We should all be very happy afer all thats the one we voted for!
Posted by: Michael A | August 09, 2006 at 11:01
I like it! Very clever image and message (all good things spring from Conversatism etc). Not sure about the shade of blue they seemed to have chosen though, seems a little purple.
But anyway, you guys must be onto a winner if a non Tory like me likes it!
Posted by: leon | August 09, 2006 at 11:05
Unwillingness to mention the blogsphere is pathetic and petty. I remember watching Channel 4's treatment of the faked Reuters pictures, referring to Little Green Footballs et al as "conspiracy theorists" rather than the checkers of "facts."
I like the oak tree, it's certainly a warmer image (no pun intended) than the torch.
Posted by: Henry Whitmarsh | August 09, 2006 at 11:18
Thank you Julian. Your shadow cabinet-tree comparisons were very funny btw!
Posted by: Editor | August 09, 2006 at 11:33
"I agree with a comment made on radio 5......it does look like a mushroom cloud."
:-) Well we know the first initial of the past three Tory leaders who actually faced/will face the public in a general election are W.M.D, so perhaps it is fitting!
Posted by: Chad | August 09, 2006 at 11:45
Editor, I must say all this 'Acknowledgment rating' etc. seems a bit narcisistic and unneccesary. I appreciate that as the creator of this useful resource it is of concern to you, but whether we the readers really need to be treated to a verdict on whether CH was mentioned and with enough due reverence in every article is a different matter.
Posted by: Rob | August 09, 2006 at 12:31
Logos need refreshing from time to time but it seems singularly inappropriate to replace the torch of liberty with a touchy, feely sprig of foliage at a time when our freedoms are under unparalled threat externally (Islamist terrorism , EU lawmaking) and internally ( lifestyle police , high taxes , ID cards and numerous others).
Posted by: DAVID HENRY | August 09, 2006 at 12:59
"Please can we NOT have another day of ranting pensioners demanding that our ancient torch symbol (under which Disraeli defeated Gladstone etc) be retained."
Okay, how about a 28 year old who thinks the proposed new logo looks bloody stupid? The most recent incarnation of the torch looks a tad Soviet for my taste and I didn't see anything wrong with the version it replaced. What is the point of opting for a multi colour tree logo which is apparently going to look like a mushroom cloud on most literature put out by local associations? How many associations have the facilities to print full colour leaflets in house? At least the torch works in black and white.
Posted by: CM | August 09, 2006 at 13:41
Rob,
I agree it would be OTT to rate newspapers' courtesy every time they use a CH story (if we had the time we could compile a pretty damning dossier for the Press Plagiarist of the Year Award), but that isn't our intention.
I think it is an issue worth flagging up though - newspapers are very reluctant to give blogs the oxygen of publicity.
Posted by: Deputy Editor | August 09, 2006 at 14:08
To David Henry's "Islamist terrorism , EU lawmaking) and internally ( lifestyle police , high taxes , ID cards and numerous others" I would add the debt crisis, soldiers dying for lack of support, the collapse of the NHS, the need to face up to nuclear power [someone' "warmer image" won't help in the winter)
We have a battle to win and all these whinging so-called Tories who are frightened by an inspiring torch have little to offer. And this "ranting pensioner" answered her country's call when it came and helped at D-Day. What a lot of lily-livered people there are arounf!
Go have a shower with the Boy Cameron.
Posted by: christina speight | August 09, 2006 at 14:55
CM @ 13:41
Yes, you're right! You're right! You're damn right!
Posted by: Peter M. | August 09, 2006 at 15:11
Daily Mail also has pics of Dave with his shirt off.....giving me yet another reason not to like him
Posted by: Jade | August 09, 2006 at 17:58
Ive noticed a comment by me was used by the Independent today. At the end, "Cameron, dont do this"...twas me!
Posted by: James Maskell | August 09, 2006 at 17:58
Those photos were hilarious. One, horrible physique. Second, no hair! Third, the cheeky grab. Fourth, the shorts.
Its great comedy!
Posted by: James Maskell | August 09, 2006 at 18:02
While the country happily falls about our ears in all areas up over upon planet conservative 'logos' are what dominates debate and whether or not to go for a tree! ...hmmm?well for me a voter something more simple like policys would do!, still should they still be looking for logo ideas can I suggest what a radio 2 listener suggested today a Rubic Cube as it's new party logo because like the conservatives a rubic cube is something thats started with good intentions but after a while when not much is happening you just end up getting bored with it!
Posted by: Chris Ryder | August 09, 2006 at 19:41
My comment that I thought this logo (like much of the rest of Cameron's leadership) was deleted.
Clearly freedom of speech has limits at ConservativeHome.
Posted by: Goldie | August 09, 2006 at 20:18
Please disregard my previous comment. Editors: feel free to delete both comments.
Posted by: Goldie | August 09, 2006 at 21:13
What happens if a rival party submits an oak tree as one of its permitted three ballot paper logos to the electoral commission today?
Unless it had a blue trunk (I don't recall ever seeing a tree with a blue trunk) and especially if like most Oak Trees it had visible gaps in the greenery with bits of wood and sky visible through it, I don't really see that there could be any objections.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | August 09, 2006 at 22:53
The Electoral Commission can rule against accepting logos if, in their opinion, it is likely to cause confusion. However this oak tree has not yet been registered at all, so another party or spoiler candidate could do it.
Posted by: Preston | August 10, 2006 at 05:51
The Electoral Commission can rule against accepting logos if, in their opinion, it is likely to cause confusion.
Given the publicity over it the Conservative Party would have clearly established copyright over that particular image and surely on those grounds the Electoral Commission would not accept that particular image if presented to them by another party.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | August 10, 2006 at 07:44
Centre-right party adopts oak tree logo. Now where have I seen that before?
Err.. oh dear... how unfortunate... http://www.u-m-p.org/site/Portfolio.php !!!
(Scroll down to the photos to see Sarkozy behind a rostrum in which even the colour of the logo is almost identical).
So much for leaving the EPP. It seems Dave did learn something after all when he visited Sarko.
Posted by: Laine McDavid | September 06, 2006 at 22:52