New UKIP logo apes Premier League lion

UKIP have decided to change their logo in an attempt to make the party more relevant in a post-Brexit world.

They announced that they’ve removed the pound sign because it is “not resonating with today’s voters” and then unveiled two options:

UKIP new logo 2017 conference premier league lion big screen
photo credit @danbloom1
Alternate logo ukip 2017 conference
photo credit @danbloom1
UKIP logo 2016
Old logo

The conference voted on the one which looks incredibly similar to the logo used by the Premier League.

Using an animal in a logo is often a good way to attach positive feelings towards an organisation or cause.

When people see a depiction of an animal it evokes existing emotions that they have towards the creature.  A lion is typically associated with feelings like bravery, strength and – through its link to royalty –  tradition.

In choosing to use a lion as part of their logo, UKIP are hoping that some of the feelings people have towards the King of the Jungle will rub off on their party.

But they have made a big mistake in making their logo so similar to the Premier League’s and it will cause them problems in both the short and the long term.


One of the key aspects of creating a successful brand is making it distinctive, so that people can quickly recognise it and easily know what it relates to. Given that the Premier League is more famous and spend more money on communication, in the long term there’s no way UKIP could expect to ‘own’ the logo.

And in the short term it has led to them being ridiculed on social media, meaning that any initial associations people might have with the logo will likely be negative.

Political Marketing in the USA

political marketing in the united states jennifer lees marshment

political marketing matrix jennifer lees marshment

A new book on political marketing, with a focus on the USA, edited by Jennifer Lees-Marshment, Brian Conley and Kenneth Cosgrave has been released.  It’s available to purchase here

The book first underlines the importance of marketing to almost every facet of politics before providing in depth analysis of practically every aspect, including: voter targeting, database management, social media practice, celebrity endorsement, fundraising, branding and advertising.

As well as codifying a vocabulary for discussing the discipline, the authors have also created a particularly useful matrix (featured above) which outlines all the political marketing activity that a campaign can and should undertake.

Many successful political operators have a good natural instinct for political marketing activity or through experience have picked up that many of the methods are crucial to success.  But I wonder how many political campaigns have a singular marketing chief who has these tasks written into their job description.

If I was running a political campaign, the authors’ political marketing matrix would be the ongoing basis for my ‘to do’ list and the blueprint for structuring my organisation.