Design Literacy: Understanding Graphic Design

dark shadows over both its more benign product lines and its aggressive
cultural philanthropy. According to http://www.identityworks.com,a Web site that
reviews new CI programs, this switch from emphasizing Philip Morris’s
more negative possessions, regardless of how profitable, to its more
acceptable corporate assets was overdue: “At long last, management accepted
the obvious need to distinguish the corporate brand from its tobacco
businesses.” Or, as the official corporate literature opines: “The name ‘Philip
Morris’ is truly a tobacco name—a name associated with a remarkable
history as a leader in that industry, both in the United States and around the
world. But we also have come to own a number of companies that are not
tobacco-based... Altria Group will clarify its identity as what it is: a parent
company to both tobacco and food companies that manages some of the
world’s most successful brands.” As articulate as the above may be, and
however naïve I may sound, something is still disturbing about an identity
intended to conceal complicity in one of society’s most dreaded health risks.
Incidentally, the name “Altria” derives from the Latin word altus,
meaning “high,” which the corporate literature states, “connotes an
enterprise that aims for peak performance and constant improvement. Our
goal is that, over time, the name also will reflect the seven attributes that
we believe define who we are and how we grow our businesses:
performance; marketing excellence applied by our consumer packaged
goods companies; commitment to responsibility; financial strength;
innovation; compliance and integrity; and dedication to people.” So,
reading between the lines, to distance itself from secondary smoke and
other related issues, this corporation selected ecclesiastical Latin for
repositioning itself, because it is both enigmatic andspiritual.
Many other corporations have likewise adopted Latin- or Greek-
sounding names not only because they are attempting to concoct new
mythologies for themselves, but also because everyday English words and
names are becoming something of an endangered species. The diminishing
pool of common identifiers that are available for use as trademarks is the
result of two trends, according to Frank Martinez, a trademark and
intellectual property lawyer: “First is the growing practice of filing
applications to federally register a trademark based upon a bona fide
intention to use the trademark sometime in the future. Corporations like to
know that they own the right to use the proposed trademark prior to
devoting valuable resources to building a brand.”
The second reason grows directly out of the emphasis trademark
law places on the “distinctiveness” of a trademark: “The made-up business
name is considered ‘fanciful’ or ‘arbitrary,’ and is considered ‘inherently
distinctive’ by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.” As competition gets