I saw this article today:

Iran Objects "Racist" London 2012 Olympics Logo

And being a designer, of course I am always intrigued how design can be perceived differently by different people. 

Basically the gist of the article is that the government of Iran has their knickers in a twist because some nutjob squinted their eyes at the logo for the 2012 London games and thinks that it says "Zion".  Apparently that is a biblical term for Jerusalem. And Iran doesn't like Jerusalem. And in the true spirit of good sportsmanship (sarcasm), Iran has refused to compete with Israeli athletes. They even sent out a letter urging other Muslim states to oppose this "racist" logo. Even if it did say "zion", I'm not sure how that is racist. And wouldn't racist be refusing to compete against athletes just because they come from Israel? Who's the racist now, Iran?  Irony!

I don't know about you, but besides just being a generally hideous logo, I just don't see it:

If anything, I see "ZOR".  The International Olympic Committee maintains that the logo represents "2012" and nothing else.  Seems logical, since the games in question are being held in 2012 and all.

What is even more interesting is that the logo design has been approved and distributed since 2007.  Way to be relevant, Iran. 

It's funny - whenever I am asked what I'm studying in school and I say Graphic Design, I usually get one of two reactions:

1.  What the hell is that?
2.  Oh, you're an art major (translation "Oh, you're taking a fluff major")

But articles like these remind not just us how important design is on the world.  In this case, it has the ability to affect political agendas.  Something as seemingly innocuous as a logo for the Olympic games has now taken on a hostile political and racially charged slant.  Not such a fluff-major thing now, heh?