The Interaction Design Association held their inaugural design conference early February 2008. Unfortunately I was traveling in China and didn’t get an opportunity to go but I’ve been told it was quite the gathering of minds. For those who also missed it you can access the majority of the speaker sessions at Brightcove. Unfortunately only a handful include slide and speaker documentation. Stick to the larger talks (i.e. Alan Cooper or Bill Buxton) they have been edited and are easier to follow.

The New York Times recently reviewed Toyota’s Scion brand’s online marketing efforts: Scion Speak. What I can’t believe is the surface level evaluation by NYT.

“With an eye to the social networking ethos that made Facebook and MySpace wildly popular”.
What eye is that? The lack of social connection and a sense of place?!?!

“Harnessing, imitating and creating social networks to promote a brand.”
This is a social network?!?

What they fail to see is that the logo application is not integrated in anyway. Yes you can download it and if you wanted to put it as an IM icon you could but what are we talking about here? Well this is a car company, why can’t this logo be integrated with parts or decals for my vehicle? Why aren’t groups formed around these logos to create a sense of purpose or collectiveness? Of course these groups would need goals but even at the very base leveraging existing social networks to proliferate whatever message they’re trying to proliferate. You can’t even see how well your creation is doing amongst the vast valley of other logos: a high priority item of an ego surfer.

To me it seems like a lot of bloat that people may come to dwell on, even create a logo but there is no reason for someone to stay or return. The tool itself only allows for a limited range of creativity.

In the end, if this is the bar of a satisfied client, marketing agencies will be happy to know that they will be gainfully employed for the foreseeable future.