When Slack Updated Its Logo, the Internet Lost Its Mind. When Burberry Changed Its Typeface, Designers Cried “Blasphemy”

Reading Time: 2 minutes

But what if these tiny tweaks weren’t just surface-level redesigns—what if they were strategic revolutions in disguise?

In an age where every pixel can spark outrage, modern rebrands are no longer subtle moves behind closed doors. They’re cultural events—watched, critiqued, and dissected in real-time. 

We don’t just see brands—we form emotional bonds with them. Whether it’s a color, a shape, or a font, even the slightest change can disrupt that comfort.

According to designer Caroline Bowie, “People build rituals around brands. When those shift—even slightly—it feels personal.”

This explains why Slack’s new pinwheel logo and Discord’s icon change caused uproar. It’s not that users hate change—it’s that they feel blindsided by it.

The core issue? Familiarity breeds loyalty. Disrupt that without warning, and backlash is almost guaranteed.

The designer vs user dilemma

Designers love refinement—users love familiarity. And often, those two values collide.

Many controversial rebrands (like Google’s icon flattening or Facebook’s lowercase “f” tweaks) were done for better scalability and digital cohesion.

From a design system perspective, they made total sense. From an emotional standpoint, they felt cold and clinical.

UX designer Monica Yun notes, “Most users won’t notice alignment grids. But they’ll notice if something just feels off.”

So the big question is: Are designers designing for themselves or real users?

Has branding lost its soul?

Here’s where it gets uncomfortable. The trend of minimal, sans-serif, lookalike logos—known as “blanding”—has stripped many brands of their character.

Burberry, Yves Saint Laurent, Balenciaga—once dripping with visual heritage—now look eerily interchangeable. While these tweaks aim for global clarity, they often erase personality.

One tweet summed it up: “Every fashion brand now looks like a Berlin startup.”

This design homogenization raises a red flag: In chasing simplicity, are we flattening identity?

Not all tweaks fail if they’re strategic

While some redesigns flop, others strike cultural gold.

Burger King’s 2021 retro refresh brought back the ‘90s aesthetic with a modern twist—earning praise across social and design circles.

Discord’s minor visual tune-up aligned well with its Gen Z audience. Even Airbnb’s initially mocked logo eventually became iconic.

So what’s the difference? Context and communication.

“Rebrands work when they align with a brand’s evolving story. Not when they feel like a mood swing,” says brand strategist Marcus Ali.

How to avoid rebrand whiplash?

Thinking of tweaking your brand visuals? Here’s how to do it without lighting the internet on fire:

• Prepare your target audience. Don’t just drop the change—explain it.
• Test it in the wild. Honest feedback trumps internal bias.
• Avoid design for design’s sake. Every visual shift should be rooted in purpose.
• Preserve what matters. Not all heritage is outdated. Keep the emotion, even if the execution evolves.

Rebrands are no longer private

What used to happen quietly in a boardroom now unfolds in public threads, TikTok breakdowns, and YouTube design critiques. You’re not just changing a logo—you’re changing perception, emotion, and experience.

So the next time you’re tempted to “just refine the logo,” pause and ask:

Is this a tweak or a turning point?