Larsen Idealog

Take That Evil Doer!

 
I don't know about the rest of the America but I'm sure glad we finally have a "Terrorist Buster" logo. Complete with drop shadow! The title on the webpage calls it the "DCI Counterterrorist Center "Terrorist Buster" Logo". So I'm assuming it's meant to signify the organization or perhaps the current counterterror campaign. As to what "Terror Busting" is, I can only assume it's similar to "smoking out evil doers". This also comes to mind.

I'm not sure if this logo is for the American public (from the picture it looks to be a lapel pin), or the terrorists. Are we supposed to rally around it as we did the Peace Dove or Rosie the Riveter? Or is it a simple "Terrorist keep out!" sign, suitable for posting at the U.S. border or along the front walk of your own home?

The simple iconography is reminiscent of the AIGA Sign System we all know and love. Although the use of the familiar circle/slash makes this icon more suited for the "No Terrorists" seating section of your favorite movie theater than a multinational campaign against evil.  

I find it interesting that they choose such a literal representation of "Terrorist". There is something to be said for the icon's ultra-simplistic nature if it is intended to be used internationally in countries with very low literacy rates. But is it? The figure appears to be wearing a ski mask, which brings to mind the Munich massacre of 1972, and this photo in particular. The icon's depiction of the AK-47, or rather the "banana" ammunition clip, certainly ties it to a specific period of time, if not locale, if not people. The AK-47, originally designed and manufactured in Russia, has had an incredible amount of international exposure due to its use by the Viet Cong in Vietnam, warlords in Somolia, and more recently the Taliban in Pakistan. It's become a symbol of American opposition and its use in this icon only serves to widen the gap between "Us" and "Them", and reinforce preexisting stereotypes. 

Is this just another lapel pin for politicians to wear? Or is there actually a plan for its implementation and use to achieve a desired result? My guess is the former. Although, when it comes to logos, should such abject failure automatically be expected from our own government? And as designers, do we have a responsibility to provide our services to those that need them, even for projects like this one? Should I be crying crocodile tears, or picking up my pencil to do it better myself?