1 
0 Written by Kennedy Chinn
The UofL Rebrand: Is it New or is it Bad?
The University of Lethbridge—home of Uleth Wildin, long hallways, and rattlesnakes. We’re known for our parking challenges and steep concrete stairways, but just over a month ago, a rebrand turned a new leaf in University of Lethbridge history. A rebrand that promises a fresh start in the upcoming year, for all students, staff, faculty and anyone passing by.
“It looks like the Walmart logo,” a sentiment echoed from multiple students.
“We’ve gone corporate minimalism.” Said another.
The rebrand was released on September 8th, the first day of the fall semester this year. The new logo kept the blue-gold colour scheme and the shape of a sun, but changed the meaning behind it to show the university’s consideration of truth and reconciliation. It unites the indigenous symbolism of the sun and the tipi. The sun, a symbol of warmth and legacy, is represented in the lines radiating from the center. Four longer lines represent tipi poles, a symbol of strength and support.
The meaning behind the design is thoroughly considered, so how has the final result had almost solely a negative reception? Is it just because it’s new? Or is the design actually bad as people say?
The original logo—a blue crest with a sun shape—was rightfully compared to the Smithsonian logo; the main differences are the sun flipped horizontally, a lighter blue colour, and a circle instead of a crest. Despite the logo first appearing at the UofL’s opening in 1967, its legacy as a Smithsonian rip-off still persists in conversation today.
“It looks like a loading symbol,” said a student when questioned in the cafeteria.
“Glad I got my diploma before they changed it,” said an alumnus online. (Source: ULethbridge Logo)
Posts about the logo update have comments filled with critical comparisons. One concerned comment on the r/Lethbridge subreddit asks: “They surely must have considered that it’s an anus right? I can’t believe no one brought it up.” This is followed up in the thread with another scathing remark on the same topic: “Man, the city of Lethbridge logo is a toilet and the uni is a butthole… Is the City trying to say it’s shitty?” (Source: R/Lethbridge)
Changes to logos or place names in Lethbridge are frequently met with animosity that seems to stick for a long time. For example, the Canada Games Sportsplex—which was renamed the ENMAX Centre in 2000 — is now called the Visitlethbridge.com Arena. This was met with similar distaste, some Lethbridge residents going as far as to say they never stopped calling it the Sportsplex, even when it was called the ENMAX.
Rebranding the University logo or ENMAX centre triggered criticism that didn’t seem to simmer as would be expected with a neutral or positive change. The renaming of the Sportsplex to ENMAX had similar comments to the Smithsonian-style logo of the University of Lethbridge, but the complaint dropped into the background as normalcy set in. However, the opinion didn’t change–people stopped talking once it wasn’t new.
Months after its release, the conversation about the University’s new logo still persists. A recently interviewed student said, “I wish they did something more interesting. They had so much potential with the indigenous Tipii idea since there are so many shapes they could have used, but no, it matches all the other boring corporate logos.”
So, do you think public opinion on the logo will grow to recognize the positive aspects? Or, is it destined to end up like the VisitLethbridge.com Arena—hated, then ignored, and still called by its old name?
