Change Makers

This is the fifth theme of a series of seven. We’ve developed these to help us decide on the future direction of the Mozilla brand, and now we want your thoughts as well.

This theme puts Mozilla forward as the voice of the Internet who seeks change, and wants to make it better. Read the words, consider the pictures*, then ask yourself:

Does this reflect what Mozilla promises to the world?
Does this reinforce the experiences and values Mozilla delivers?
Does this communicate the ‘right’ image to the world?

Please use the comments below to let us know what you think.

* The images you see on these boards are for illustrative purposes only. Don’t take offense if we’ve used an image of your company or project – please be flattered.

8 comments on “Change Makers”

  1. Rob Pape wrote on

    Think this is a good direction as it displays the desire to have change and be trail blazers to speak up and make that difference that is needed. I could see this as the voice of Mozilla.

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      Thanks, Rob. The “doers not dreamers” line in this option got a lot of love when we shared it with a group of Mozillians recently. Do you think it is enough of an invitation to folks outside of Mozilla to join with us?

  2. Axel Hecht wrote on

    This one doesn’t resonate with me at all. I’d favor a goal over the way to get there.
    On top, there are 2-3 political parties here in Germany that have their foundations in “change” or “not status quo”. All of them struggle, to various degrees, to not be taken over by extremist minorities.
    IMHO, putting “change” as a value in to an organization makes that organization weak and volatile.

    That said, as a secondary attribute to a strong brand, change is a good thing. But I doubt that’s what we’re after right now?

  3. Eric Shepherd wrote on

    To me, “Change” is just politician-speak for “more of the same.” It’s not really an attribute for an organization.

    I would however love something about creating software and services which let us do our part to make the Web and the world that revolves around the Web a better, safer, and more enjoyable place. Let’s make good things happen together.

    You also need to be cautious about selecting political figures and organizations—in particular, recent ones—as representations of a brand identity. I saw various combinations of people and groups above who would not be positive symbols for a number of people I know.

    What I’m noticing is that most of these themes have bits and pieces I like but in general I’m not a huge fan of any of them. It’s interesting.

    Also, while “Doers, not dreamers” sounds good, all I can think is “you say ‘doers, not dreamers'” but surround this phrase with imagery and statements all about dreaming of change. That seems funny to me.

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      You have a good point here as well, Eric. Especially as a global brand, we need to be cognizant of using political figures as a shortcut to values. Rest assured that these are there to provoke exactly this sort of conversation and are not likely to be a part of our brand identity. (That said, Apple did a pretty solid job of using figures like Ghandi, Mohammad Ali, JFK, and Dr. King in the advertising campaign called “Think Different” surrounding their brand launch – so never say never.) I love the sentiment of “Let’s make good things happen together.” That’s something we have proven we can do time and again.

  4. M.A. Zamani wrote on

    Seems to be the strongest theme. Growth might also be a similar term to consider, esp since Mozilla is trying to grow out of its popular Firefox image. Honestly, ghe other themes smack of traditional patriotism, like the themes were pulled from the Pledge of Allegiance or some other nationalistic oath. Perhaps even “patriarchal”. Growth, change, the new, the future – these are the modern concerns of the progressive global citizen.

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      Thanks, M.A. Yes, it’s interesting how concepts like “Freedom” are so woven into historical ideas patriotism, and have been appropriated by particular political parties and groups, that it can be hard to apply them to a new context like the Internet. Were we to move forward with Freedom as a direction, for instance, our visual language would have to steer clear of any suggestion that we’re representing a single point of view. Setting our sites on the future growth of the Internet as a means of expression and independence for all would be a way to embrace the concept of freedom without the baggage that many now associate with that word. Thanks for adding to this conversation.

  5. André Jaenisch wrote on

    This collage resonates with me.
    When looking at Mozilla’s recent engagement like Let’s Encrypt, Mozilla Thimble, Mozilla Codemoji I see examples where Mozilla wants to change the way things are thought of today (and educate the masses).

    Mozilla is not to shy to speak up. For example, displaying a promotion to (which is highly needed since net neutrality is at stake in Europe). Another example in the U.S. would be comments on FCC.
    Other parts of the world (South America, Asia, Africa) are covered by the community (why?).

    “Too much privilege for the few” is a topic Mozilla should deal with internally first before rebranding. Mitchell is inviting thoughts on her blog.
    My last bad experience were with the renaming of Mozilla Community Design (on GitHub) to Open Design – out of a sudden. Elio could tell me that they got consent on MozLondon. But from the point of view of a contributor it wasn’t clear that the name would change. We have to work on that. An announcement being the absolute minimum.

    I consider Open Design as a step in the right direction for gathering the ideas of many.