After initially saying a committee would work to improve its controversial new logo, the Emerson Athletic Department instead decided to hold a design competition open to the college community, which it announced on Sept. 25.
Though the original deadline for submissions was Oct. 5, the committee for creating a new logo wanted to give students more time to submit their ideas and extended it to Oct. 12, according to junior Danny Dranoff, a student representative on the committee.
“We had a nice round of entries after the initial deadline, but we didn’t think people were talking about it enough,” said the marketing communication major. “We didn’t get enough submissions to the point that we felt everyone had a fair chance.”
He said the committee has received 20 submissions in the days since the deadline was pushed back.
Dranoff said he got involved this summer after viewing the promo YouTube video that went along with the unveiling of the ill-received original logo. This logo, created by the Boston-based Phoenix Design & Development, cost $8,500 to produce, according to athletic director Pat Nicol.
“When I shared the video and got [a lot] of negative comments, I realized there was a real problem,” Dranoff said, “So I drafted an email to [President M.] Lee Pelton with the pitch that, if we have talented kids, then why are we outsourcing?”
The outcome of that email, along with other comments from the student body, was the formation of a new logo committee. Members include Ronald Ludman, the dean of students; Andrew Tiedeman, vice president for communication and marketing; Dranoff, the student representative; Nicol; and a student athlete and athletic department faculty member to be named.
The winner of the contest will not be compensated, a fact that some students are finding hard to swallow.
Jake Schwartz, a sophomore visual and media arts major, said he is not happy about the way Emerson went about the process.
“We are an art school; we have people who know how to design things,” said Schwartz, “so why [they] wouldn’t go to the students in the first place is beyond me.”
Schwartz plans to submit a design despite a lack of payment.
“If they hadn’t gone to the company first and paid them, then the issue of not paying students wouldn’t have come up,” he said. “I like that we have the choice to do it now, but I think the process to get to this point is not acceptable.”
The committee will select three submissions by Oct. 14, according to Dranoff, and there will a schoolwide vote to determine the best one from there.
Once a winner is chosen, the student will work with Phoenix Design & Development to finalize the design.