
At first I thought this was a way-too-early April fool’s joke. On the heels of some recent “streamlined” rebranding failures (Pepsi, Tropicana) I just figured someone tried to ridicule their efforts by doing something worse.
When I googled “Scifi Syfy” my heart sank, as I found nearly a hundred existing articles all published this morning that confirmed the announcement.
What could possibly possess a much-loved channel to boldly go and cripple their image? Who can we hold responsible for this decision? Read on as we discuss their skewed logic, in a futile attempt to understand why it’s not cool to be into alients, robots, and spaceships.
So here are the facts:
- After 16 years of catering to our taste for Robots, Aliens, and Spaceships, SciFi Channel is morphing their name into SyFy as “part of a rebranding campaign that seeks to distinguish the channel and its programming from cable competitors — 75 of which are also measured by the Nielsen ratings service.” (via NYTimes)
I’m sorry? How many other SciFi Channel’s are there? “SyFy” sounds like a street term for a disease one would catch from not having protection.
- “Without abandoning our legacy or our core audience, we needed to cultivate a distinct point of view with a name that we could own that invites more people in and recognizes our broader range of programming with literally something for everyone,” says SciFi President David Howe. (via SciFi Wire)
Cut the crap, David. If you read between the lines, he’s trying to tell us that it will then be totally fine to throw in some reruns of The O.C. and Dawson’s Creek, and probably another reality cooking show, because that sort of programming offers “something for everyone” just because the channel’s name will be so ambiguous and abstract. Defenders of this choice would tell you that it just makes them more “unique.” I say, leetspeak isn’t funny or “cool” outside of internet chatrooms and WoW. It’s stupid, juvenile, and encourages bad spelling.
- Syfy—unlike the generic entertainment category “sci-fi”—firmly establishes a uniquely ownable trademark that is portable across all nonlinear digital platforms and beyond, from Hulu to iTunes. Syfy also creates an umbrella brand name that can extend into new adjacent businesses under the Syfy Ventures banner, including Syfy Games, Syfy Films and Syfy Kids. (via SciFi Wire)
Now, this is the one sensible reason I could support. I understand that one can’t copyright the name “Scifi” because it’s shorthand for the name of an entire genre.
- This is the one that pisses me off.
The principal reason the idea kept coming up, Mr. Howe said, was a belief “the Sci Fi name is limiting.”“If you ask people their default perceptions of Sci Fi, they list space, aliens and the future,” he added. “That didn’t capture the full landscape of fantasy entertainment: the paranormal, the supernatural, action and adventure, superheroes.”
I don’t even know what to say about that. Clearly Mr. Howe. doesn’t know his audience. If you’re into space, aliens, robots, the future, you’re most likely to be into all other realms of fantasy. Whoever told him that Star Wars fans hate J.R.R. Tolkien and Ghosthunters needs to be punched in the throat.
Reportedly the name “Syfy” was a brainchild of an internal team, along with Landor & Associates (who I truthfully respect). I can’t help but think that a corporate highroller suggested it in a meeting, because it just “sounds cool.”
The slogan for this new campaign is “Imagine Greater.” It sounds like a placeholder for something more substantial and provocative, but perhaps it also speaks the truth. For instance there are many things we could imagine that are greater than this rebranding.
Edit: Admittedly, I reacted to this change before I really thought about it. I can support the copyright reason, but every other excuse to rebrand seems empty and meaningless. It’s just a bunch of PR nonsense. I just wish there was something more remarkable about the logo itself that would impress the masses enough to get over the fact that it’s “Syfy” and not “Sci Fi”
I like your points, but I also understand their need to rebrand. Especially regarding the copyright terms. SyFy looks and sounds weird (initially I thought maybe it was on the periodic chart and I had heretofore missed it), but it is unique and thusly can be marketed more specifically, yet to a broader audience. Still, kind of gets pwned by Pepsi-as-Asian-airline logo. I don’t know whether to use Pepsi as a beverage or my one-stop shop for all my travel needs.
+1 for the disease, hadn’t noticed but you’re right… Srsly, this is a very bad idea to change Sci-fi/Syfy name/logo, the previous version is very cool, and the logo too.
Why “Syfy”? it doesn’t mean anything ! No one will understand “science-fiction” in this name. It’s a loss of identity. And the logo is ugly.
This is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard. I can hardly wrap my mind around the idiocy. Plus, this is going to make it really difficult to continue pronouncing it “skiffy”.
um, does this explain why syfyportal.com suddenly out of nowhere changed their name? maybe they got paid off? syfy was fine for that site, but for a tv channel it’s a giant meh. well after battlestar is over next week, they’ve pretty much run out of things for me to watch on there. i’ll give the new stargate about 5 mins. eureka i won’t miss.
I’ve come to the conclusion that the copyright reason is the core of the change. They stand to gain more $$ if it can be done this way, it seems.
In an attempt to justify it to the masses, instead of just saying “we want to earn more $$ so we can have greater control over the brand” they’ve given us a handful of bullshit reasons.
I hope this rebranding means that they will also focus on the quality and content of whatever it is they produce under the new moniker.
Oh who am I kidding, these people made “Anonymous Rex.”
“If you’re into space, aliens, robots, the future, you’re most likely to be into all other realms of fantasy. Whoever told him that Star Wars fans hate J.R.R. Tolkien and Ghosthunters needs to be punched in the throat.”
I take exception to that. I have absolutely no interest in any non-science-based genres. Clarke’s three laws state that “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic,” and that’s exactly what I am interested in, whether it be the “gods” of the Stargate genre, or even the “Force” of Star Wars, I always enjoy someone figuring out that incantations are not the solution.
Perhaps I am not part of the subculture of which you speak; I do actually believe on God. I just happen to think of Him as exceptionally clever, not a wizard.
@Tony
You’re absolutely right. I didn’t mean to make it seem so black and white, except I wanted to point out that your preference to science-based genres is exactly what Syfy is looking to move away from.
Perhaps nothing will change with their programming, or quality of original shows (or the lack thereof, as some would argue), but intent weighs heavily…
..and they intend to move away from the “geeky” image that brought them the viewership they have today.
Copyright isn’t really an issue at all. It doesn’t relate to branding.
And there’s no trademark issue at all. Discovery, the History Channel, and Food Network all have trademarks and merchandising.
So the one thing that seemed to make sense, doesn’t.
Syfy? Fail.
[...] Geekadelphia brings the horrifying news that The SciFi Network will soon be lobotomized rebranded as Syfy. I’ve got two issues with this: [...]
I liked that SciFi wasn’t marketed to a broader audience– it was interesting that there was a niche that supported a station. There are TONS of people who love it for exactly what it is right now.
Eh, it sounds like SciFi channel reps want to eat lunch with the football players and cheerleaders to me… why else would they try to fix something that isn’t broken?
[...] for an assault by our own Timmy Q and Bianca C. Not because of upcoming shows like Caprica, but because of the ridiculous rebranding. And like any good gaming convention, there are going to be tournaments, giveaways, and of [...]