Last night, South Australia’s new brand was launched by Premier Jay Weatherill in a public light and sound show at Elder Park which included the new brand being projected onto the Festival Theatre sails. A great way to launch it, sure, but do we like it? Will it work? Does it fulfill the brief to “communicate our unique identity”?

As with any rebrand, there will be detractors. Realistically, it’s virtually impossible to please everyone. As was the case this time around, a rebrand of the state tends to be a somewhat fraught process. Too many people and organisations want and expect to be able to contribute their two cents, and passionate opinions from too many different directions can end up compromising the end result.

There’s also been a lot of build up and a carefully executed communications plan preceding the launch. With this hype comes high anticipation and expectations – we all wanted to be inspired and excited by what we saw.

Unfortunately, in the eyes of many of us, the new brand has fallen well short of expectations. Twitter lit up and parody images started circulating immediately, with comparisons to a folded milk carton, origami, a cartoon house and a monopoly hotel rife. And where’s Tasmania? Where’s Kangaroo Island and our unique coastline? If we’re going to identify South Australia through the use of a map, shouldn’t we include all states and one of South Australia’s most iconic and well-known tourism destinations?

I can’t say the new brand is making me jump out of my skin with excitement. It says “doorway to Australia” to me – but not in a way that identifies South Australia unless you already know where the state is. It looks like you pass straight through South Australia and don’t look back – “last one out please shut the door”, as one journalist commented via Twitter. The symbolism of South Australia as an entry point to Australia is also somewhat flawed – our international connections when it comes to air travel are far from envious. It lacks creative flair or zing. To me, it looks like a logo that has gone through so many review processes and has been tweaked so many times that it has lost its original spark. And yes, it looks like a house.

However, at the end of the day, it’s just a visual and there is a lot more to selling South Australia than this one visual. Admittedly, it’s an important element but it can hardly be expected to “make a bold statement about our place in Australia and our place in the world” by itself. That’s a very lofty ambition. Its success or failure will ultimately rest more on how we use it, what we communicate with it and how it is interpreted beyond our borders. By itself, it is not going to communicate that we are creative, innovative and can-do. But if it’s used the right way it might help to support that message and positioning.

I am heartened that there appears to be open encouragement to industry to use the new branding. State and government department branding is often fiercely protected by strict branding guidelines and arduous approval processes. I completely understand the need for those brand guidelines (I write enough of them myself) but past experience has shown too much bureaucracy simply results in the brand not being used at all – or being misused more than it would have been if guidelines and approval processes were characterised by just a bit more freedom and a little less bureaucracy.

So, here’s to the new South Australian brand – the reality is it’s here to stay, at least for a while – and now it’s up to all of us to make it work the best we can. I think we all know it’s no maple leaf or 100% Pure. Whilst those brands took a while to reach the iconic status they now occupy, I for one don’t think we’ll ever get there with this logo. But that doesn’t mean I won’t support it because ultimately, I want to support South Australia and South Australian businesses – and supporting the brand is an integral part of that.