I actually have a theory about this. There have been studies that link times of stress (mostly financial) inversely with the complication level of favorite songs. Basically, the more stressed a group is, the more they prefer simple and repetitive music. My guess is that can apply to other forms of media and art. The other possibility is that no one really writes by hand anymore which means that artistic fonts are being used less because to the average non-cursive user, they are difficult to read.

I feel like everyone in those tweets are overthinking it. What it comes down to is money. For the logos, it's cheaper to just use a font that is available on any PC. Its also easier/cheaper to have just a logo that is accessible in ANY country, not just ones that speak english or use english letters. One logo design globally instead of one for each country/region. For the doorbells and phone booths etc Its cheaper to have a design that is easily made by simple factory techniques such as molding a flat object, or cutting a cylinder, as opposed to laser cutting a complicated pattern. For the buildings its cheaper to manufacture a kit made from all the same flat parts. Cheaper to manufacture, quicker (and therefore cheaper) to construct. For the bookcases, it's cheaper and faster to just make fibre wood and cut it into planks, over the craftsmanship needed for an antique style bookcase. Cheaper for the end client too.

Another aspect of design periods throughout history is when new styles were developed in reaction/rebellion to the current. For example, look at the The International Typographic Style. Everything was super clean, typographical (hello Helvetica), used photography and was about being functional. The era of art in contrast around that time was the print advertisements (I’m blanking on the name of that era) that feature hand drawn elements, loud display typography etc. I even notice currently, that we’re finally stepping away from minimalism and going into more display fonts and experimental design which is exciting! (though none of these corporate logos in this article show that). Just another element to consider in addition to what was mentioned in this article, design is not made in a vacuum.

It's quite simple: accessibility, small screens (less pixels to fit an intricate design into), craft vs mass production (furniture), and just general style preference over the years. When the world started making those (now) beautiful phone booths and poles, Arts and Crafts movement were shouting that they are horrible, because they were mass produced. When the Eiffel tower was built, Parisians hated it, but now it's iconic. Times change, this too shall pass.

I think the biggest two reasons are accessibility and scale. The Pepsi logo needs to be as easily identifiable as a tiny icon on an apple watch or android phone app ordering ubereats as a billboard 1000 yards away. A logo needs to be read as easily by a person with cataracts as someone who is dyslexic or colorblind or has 20/20 vision. When you were one of 20 tailors on Savile Road, a unique font was a way to get a Victorian gentleman to walk in your door. Now most of your business is online and it needs to be easily identified on both a Japanese website and Spanish YouTube commercial.

This is one of the most useless observations I've ever seen. The reason brand logos look the same is because no one cares about branding. It just has to be distinct enough for people to recognize. The reason they other things are simply designed is because that's less expensive to mass produce. Nobody wants to pay $1000 more for a pretty doorbell camera. They want one that's affordable and effective. Beyond that this observation doesn't hold up. Plenty of furniture makers still make beautiful one of a kind pieces. Art is still unique and beautiful. Artists are still creative and finding new ways to use all sorts of tools to create art. This guy is a whiny idiot who can't find anything useful to do, so he's just looking for nonsense to complain about.

He's not "revealing" anything - it's a series of guesses that he posted on twitter.

I thought it would of been one of two reasons: 1. Usability and readability for visually impaired folks. 2. Because it's trendy

I got only one thing to say: Aesthetics/beauty is so much more than ornamentation. If a minimalist design (of anything) is "flat/bland/sterile/timid/unimaginitive" and not "pleasant/joyous/inviting" you can be sure that it is becasue it is NOT well-designed.

Another one of these ridiculous articles. They could have easily argued that the Pepsi logo used to look very similar to the Coca Cola one but now it's distinct and has its own personality. Instead they claim it looks flat and it was better when it looked like Coca Cola. But when other logos used to look different (they come from different eras with different styles) but now they look similar, that's also bad. The premise of this article is: old logos=good, new logos=bad so the author does everything in his power to prove this, even if it envolves cherrypicking and having self-contradictory standards for what is good and what is bad.

I've noticed a similar thing in music, particularly in metal. Everything just kinda sounds flat and cliche now. Maybe part of it is me getting older, but when I hear an album that came out 20 years ago for the first time, it's still new to me. Everything now has the same drum sound, the same guitar tone, riffs and solos are all pretty similar. No one's doing weird or out there stuff.

I think part of this is an illusion brought about by 'age compression', by which I mean that periods of time in the past seem shorter because they are less significant to us. So for example, we tend to think of 'the 19th Century' as one period of time with a given aesthetic, and also 'the 1970s'. But of course a lot of things changed in the 9th century, because it was 100 years. And even 'the 1970s' wasn't really one aesthetic, it was 10 years. We wouldn't think of something 10 years old as representative of 'now'. And since designs change over time, there are obviously more variety of designs in a decade than in a year.

As a designer myself, I can kind of understand this for the online platform. Take things like Figma for example. The whole idea is to be able to get layouts done quickly and as simply as possible with the intent of having the best UX possible. UX online vs UX in real life are two completely different beasts. So long as we don't lose that beauty from the print world, we're good. But then again, we're starting to see these kind of IG designs in real life too so I dunno...maybe just a phase and when we finally get VR, we won't worry so much? eh!

Blame it on linked media and globalization but - in my opinion it depends on consenting decisions. Out Brand needs to find audiences all over the word. Do a research. Ah. Sans serif is not botjering anyone. Let's do it. We need to sell.products all over the world. Make a Gaussian middle design so everyone is ok with it. Plus: deciders are swarms not experts

Not saying there's nothing to this complaint, but it's mostly dumb and presumptuous. I'll address points individually. **1** The most important thing to remember is that you're talking about CORPORATE BRAND LOGOS. If you're looking for creativity and soul in a corporate brand logo, that's pretty dumb, and you've already been suckered into their trap of making you think that they're anything more than a corporation that's trying to take your money. They have never cared about anything more than that, and looking for "personality" in their logo is fundamentally stupid, even if they have gotten blander in the past few years. **2** Many have said this so I'll keep it short, in the age of mobile internet, you need something that is legible at small and large fonts. Sans serif fonts does this better than everything else.

Or someone in france decided they want to reduce the font types... bra.png

I know that in my town, the city council needed to buy some new street lights for the historical district. They proposed buying some nice, decorative lamps that were admittedly a little pricey. Cue the local, vocal minority who actually care about this stuff, and some truly hideous lamps were installed. Total savings? About fourty grand, about a buck per resident. But, by God we don't spend one extra penny for aesthetics.

I can't speak for fonts and graphics, but when it comes to physical items like home design and manufacturing, the driving factor there is cost. Profit is King above all else. We could easily make decorative items like we did back in the 1900's or earlier, but they'd take more time and more skilled workers to make, and that means higher costs. This is especially noticeable in modern home design, or "minimalist" as they like to call it. "Open" designs, bannister-less stairs, no patios, etc. Those are all passed off as "design aesthetics" but in reality are just cost-saving mechanisms. Same thing with the new trend of "micro" or "Eco" apartments. It's all just to lower costs and maximize profits. Personality be damned, Profit is King.

Physical items, pretty cost money. In logos the more generic, the less people can judge. If the logo is capable of 'clashing' with their personal perceived image the less chance they will purchase said item.

I would not compare logos to physical world products and draw conclusions. Products are often streamlined to allow more efficient manufacturing processes & constructions and make these cheaper.

The logo thing is quite simple to explain. Most of the modern internet and social media content is heavily automated. So using CSS to generate and place your logo instead of somearge image is more efficient.

Music. I can't stand radio for 20 years now. It's all the same stuff, the same beat, same easy-to-digest c**p. All... simplified, if it is easy to crank up the volume, here is your homogeneous stuff to act like another sheep in their game...

I'm dyslexic. I still prefer the creative font, and people learned to recognize them by their distinctiveness. One thing the 'inclusiveness' conversation is leaving out are the vast numbers of people who can't read, or can't read English, in which a great number of worldwide goods are labeled. Distinctive labels aid in recognition, they don't hinder it. We aren't saying write The Whole Label in fancy font, but logos are just that - representative word art.

What's up with all the phone booth mentions? Those aren't being homogenized, they're practically extinct besides in England. Btw good article/analysis of modern design asthetics. Inevitably everything becomes white-washed for the sake of simplicity. True craftsmanship and unique design languages are of the past.

Is the message here: "things were better in the past"? How original

Just seeing logos and brands with unique fonts make them instantly recognizable that you don't have to actually read the words to know who they are. These days they are no longer appreciated, as most of us, especially the younger generations spend most of their time online, and really do not understand how beautiful these logos are. They are all for easily readable, which is a reflection of the culture now- Instant-gratification and dislike for traditions.

Music too. Example: Love songs. They used to be sweet and kind, now they’re just talking about appearance and beauty standards.

It's all part of the dumbing down. Idiocracy wasn't supposed to be a documentary or a how to for society, but here we are.

Alot of pissing and moaning ..oh where has art gone...oh the funding.....sad lot you are. Who among you is actively creating? Excuses. Your pitiful whining is contributing to the problem. Shove a paintbrush in it and get creative!