𝕏 and Me | Customers, Etc.
Does Twitter's rebrand as X feel oddly personal?
Did you know that Mathematical Double-Struck Capital X—the symbol 𝕏—has been part of Unicode since 2001? I was surprised to see the new Twitter logo show up when I pressed Control-Command-Space on my Mac and searched for ‘X’:
The Twitter rebrand happened fast, yeah? It appears that Elon Musk was tweeting about it Saturday and by Monday there was a new logo. It wasn’t a complete rebrand, mind you—the word ‘Twitter’ is still all over the site; the about page hasn’t been updated; this newsletter still refers to Twitter, tweeting, etc.—but it was an event. It happened. People can’t stop talking about it.
Was it a good decision? Will time ultimately tell? Are you skimming this article to find Customer, Etc.’s editorial position on the matter?
Differing perspectives
I’ve been trying to make sense of the rebrand. There’s the “business” perspective, which is sort of what on earth were they thinking? As referenced on the Pivot podcast, here’s Lou Paskalis, an advertising and marketing expert, on Twitter’s abandonment of its brand equity:
“The @Twitter blue bird logo is beloved, ubiquitous and has nearly 100% unaided awareness globally, something most brands never come close to achieving. Virtually every newscaster, reporter and byline features the logo, exclusively, giving the brand $$$ millions of free marketing.”
There’s also the “move fast” perspective, which recognizes how difficult it is for large companies to make big, meaningful changes in a short amount of time. Here’s Chris Savage, CEO of Wistia, on LinkedIn:
On the one hand, it throws out all the brand equity built up in our culture around Twitter and tweeting. It appears to have almost no planning and is inconsistent.
On the other hand, it's a testament to moving unbelievably fast in the name of progress. Calls for a new logo were put out on Twitter over the weekend, and the new X logo was installed on Monday. We don't get to see this type of thing very often.
It's the opposite of a thorough and thoughtful launch, which is why it's working. The name change is viral, which is hard to do and now hard to miss.
Or there’s the “organizational behavior” angle, which recognizes how it would feel to work for a leader who thinks up a major change on a Saturday night and asks for it to be implemented by Sunday. Here’s my former marketing colleague Amanda Swaty Myers on LinkedIn:
You can't manifest a rebrand, believing a cult of personality is a substitute for the brand equity it took hundreds - if not thousands - of people years to build. This would be laughable if it wasn't so sad. What an incredible waste.
…
(PS: I also feel deeply for the product marketer who wrote, "X is the future state of unlimited interactivity – centered in audio, video, messaging, payments/banking – creating a global marketplace for ideas, goods, services, and opportunities. Powered by AI, X will connect us all in ways we’re just beginning to imagine.")
The PS of course refers to the tweets by Twitter CEO Linda Yaccarino explaining the brand change after it had already been implemented. I guess someone was tasked with coming up with the copy that would try to explain in business terms what didn’t really seem to be a “business” decision.
So was this a good decision or not?
When I reflect on the rebrand, it’s odd to me how personal it feels. I mean, why do I even care? It’s not my company. A year ago, Elon Musk was in the news because he was trying to back out of a $44 billion dollar deal to buy Twitter. Now he’s in the news because he’s changed Twitter’s name to X. Really, why do I care?
Perhaps I care because when I see how the rebrand went down, the sloppiness bothers me. Not because it affects my ability to use the platform, but rather because it’s not how I would want to work, lead, or be led. “That’s not how companies are supposed to work!”, I want to scream.
Asking if the rebrand was a “good” decision feels like the wrong question. Sure, there’s a business school viewpoint that would explain why this is bad from a brand equity perspective. And would I want to work for an organization as chaotic as Twitter appears to be run? Absolutely not.
However, Twitter was already being managed in a chaotic way. It’s possible the rebrand will be directionally net positive for Twitter/X based on where they were. The chaos was a sunk cost. Perhaps it was more important for Twitter’s culture in the moment to show that they’re constantly pushing forward without concern for what people are saying on the outside.
I don’t know.
There’s a part of me that wants Twitter to fail because that would validate my feelings, but that seems like a waste of emotional energy. I can just say that style of leadership isn’t for me and move on.