Not what I would call an unbiased look at the Bush and Kerry campaign logos:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/09/opinion/09dadich.html?oref=login&oref=login
“…Folio Extra-Bold Italic letters. (Even the name of the font sounds forceful, doesn’t it?)”
Can anybody tell me why they would even publish this tripe?
I prefer Bush/Cheney’s logo as well, but the assessment comes off very weak. He’s playing on the generic perceptions of the candidates to make inane-sounding observations. Plus, he sounds about as Democratic as Cheney:
“Loose letter spacing between K and e communicates inexperience”
How about we just have the NYT publish a one-sentence article titled: “Graphic Design, It’s All As Stupid As You Thought”.
Captured from web.archive.org on 20 Aug 2018. view this capture