Whether people like the 2012 logo or not isn't the issue. Whether people appreciate and respect the 2012 brandmark is.

Most people are not equipped with the media skills required to grasp the appropriateness of brand identity work. To ask them whether or not they like the work is a biased and unfair question. Particularly if they are pressed to judge not only a 'logo' but a logo independent of the proposed experience, of the brand in its entirety and of the event itself.

The 2012 identity is appropriately different from other Olympic brand identities. The new identity fits well with the perceived attributes of the British nation as manifested in the irreverence of punk, the celebration of the anti-hero and amateur genius, the holding of intellectuals with suspicion, relentless complaint, pragmatism and the rejection of anyone who tells them what to do.

A description of a brandmark and the role a brandmark plays in a brand experience would enable people to better assess the value of the 2012 identity. Logos are familiar to most people and in many instances held in contempt with fair reason. Perhaps in some instances just for just being a 'logo'. The marks of brands, on the otherhand, require uncommon insights to appreciate. This is where more effort is required to ensure a widespread understanding of the effectiveness of the 2012 brand.

The 2012 identity is not an inane 'logo' that can be easily passed over or only appreciated by po-faced designers, this is a brandmark representing a major and as yet unprecedented brand experience. An unprecedented experience of not just another Olympics but the 2012 Olympics in a cutting-edge, media savvy and thoroughly modern Britain.

This brand identity should be should be celebrated as trailblazer.