Twitter logo

Twitter logoFrom the Twitter Trademark and Content Display Policy

This next bit, quoted from Gawker, made me smile. Per the illustration (above), you absolutely cannot:

  • Add a gray speech bubble next to the bird that makes it appear as if the bird is talking or smoking hookah
  • Make the bird be upside down
  • Reunite the bird with his bird family
  • Change the bird to a better color
  • Give the bird a small gray ledge on which to perch
  • Transform the bird into a bubble letter “t” or the word “twitter”
  • Give the bird eyes and legs and a song in his heart
  • Make the bird look the way he used to even though no one would notice

More on Gawker:
Is Twitter’s logo change the most revolutionary rebranding of the modern era?

A few thoughts from elsewhere:
A look at the new Twitter logo and what people are reading into it, Rob Alderson on It’s Nice That
Twitter Gives you the Bird, Armin Vit on Brand New
Twitter should have launched a new brand story, not just a new logo, Simon Manchipp on Design Week

Oliver Twardowski brazenly ignored the upside-down rule.

Twitter logo Batman


I like it, but there’s no need for the branding fluff. It smacks of retrofitting a needless concept onto a logo that simply looked good.

Hmm, I prefer the original bird, it’s got more charm. Who cares if it’s made out of perfect circles, if anything it makes it more corporate, which I’d say is the opposite of what Twitter feels like.

Really it’s just a tightening up of the guidelines and they took a little time to tweak the logo.

The only part of this story that interests me is whether you can use any icon to link to twitter, or if they will become brand-fascists and dictate that everything has to be bland corporate rubber stamp graphics.

I like how Simon Manchip turned his article into an ad for Someone without really saying anything about the brand. I’m not sure what the brand story is for Twitter. I’m not sure where it’s going. For now it’s a simple, easy to use conversation tool that enables me to share problems, inspiration and stories that people who follow me will hopefully find engaging…and vice versa. I hope it stays that way without adding levels of complexity on the path to stock market flotation and imminent doom.

I think it’s tilted back too much. I’d tilt it clockwise a little or move the beak down a little bit.

The new bird looks more corporate to me. I think the previous bird was better. The cartoonish look had more to do with the “tweet,” the gossip, the share. It seemed fresher, too.

I agree with Niall. It does seem like the bird is tilted back a little too much, like it’s about to do a backflip. Or maybe that’s caused by the rounded head. Color is a nice change.

There was quite a lot of unnecessary fluffiness to the description.

In a dramatic turn of events, Oliver Twardowski discovered the real reason why we can’t “rotate or change the direction of the bird.” (Post updated.)

I think the tilted angle is fine – it looks as if the bird is chirping and talking. Now would it be nice to have an eye for the bird?

I agree with Natasha, I think the little tuft added some character and the new angle of the bird looks as though it may be just about to fly into a window. However I like the new wing and head shape as well as the bird being slightly slimmed down. The new design does look ‘chirpier’ and I’m not too fussed about the colour change.

They are trying to take the Apple route, with the new guidelines about not being able to use the type versions anymore, just keeping it simple. I do like this concept but at the same time, I’m not fully convinced by it for Twitter just yet.

I kind of like the old bird. It had a little more character and didn’t seem quite as sassy as the new fellow. Companies seem to be updating their logos much more frequently these days, which is good news for the design industry.

I think it’s interesting that as of 8/22/12, Apple’s website still displays the old Twitter logo.

Share a thought