Obama's Font, Part 2

The NY Times has noticed what the LA Times noticed and I pointed out earlier this week: the font used by the Obama campaign, Gotham, doesn't just look cool - it's part of the campaign's emphasis on using coherent graphic design to send a consistent message. From a Q&A with Brian Collins, a branding expert:

"But as a result of their approach to design, the Obama campaign really stands out. From the bold “change” signs to their engaging Web site to their recognizable lapel pins, they’ve used a single-minded visual strategy to deliver their campaign’s message with greater consistency and, as a result, greater collective impact."

This is indicative of the high level of professionalism that defines the campaign generally.

"I think the real story here is less about typography than it is about
discipline . . . The Obama people have used design to take that discipline to a
whole new level. Barack Obama is running the first real transmedia campaign of
the 21st century . . . I’ve worked with giant, global corporations who don’t do
it this well."

But how important, is this, really? Do appearances really matter that much?

"Q: Do you think the typographical style actually makes a difference?
A: You bet I do. Style equals accuracy."

One of the great ironies of the campaign so far is that there are lots of people working very hard on the Obama campaign, and sometimes they work so well that it looks almost easy. Obama gives a great speech, and his opponents dismiss him as an empty suit. What they don't realize is how much effort is going into making it look effortless. In this respect, Obama is like a strange mirror image of Bush: Bush makes being president look easy because he doesn't work hard, but then his results are terrible. Obama works hard to make it look easy, but his results are very solid.