USQ rebranding

I WAS quite stunned by the recent news that the University of Southern

Queensland is changing its long-time logo and moniker/acronym.

According to a university spokesperson, the new logo will and I quote “feature a Bunya pine … The signature colours of plum and gold will be adopted, signifying the sunset over the region, and the warmth of the dynamic communities at the university.”

I realise that logos are often highly stylised but the proposed logo, as shown in The Chronicle (04/07), looks nothing like a Bunya pine tree or its leaves.

Bunya pine leaves are glossy green (not plum and gold) throughout the year and are lance-shaped with a very sharp point.

In fact the proposed logo looks more like a leaf sprig from a Ginkgo tree (Ginkgo biloba) in autumn colours. It is also known as a Maidenhair tree which is a native of China and is grown as an ornamental tree in many areas of the world.

A number of herbal potions are extracted from Ginkgo leaves that have dubious/controversial health benefits. Also, the logo could be likened to a piece of Japanese calligraphy (shujis). So, why would the university use a logo that nobody would recognise or understand? Very bizarre indeed.

The change in the moniker/acronym from USQ to UniSQ will certainly confuse a lot of people. They will ask: Is there a new uni in southern Queensland and if so, where is it located? The reasons given by university staff for rebranding have varied from vague “motherhood” statements (inclusiveness; warmth of the dynamic communities at the university) to it’s the fault of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Innovation, diversity and the development of high quality teaching and research outcomes come with good governance not tinkering with logos and monikers. So, “if it ain’t broken don’t fix it.”

AL YOUNG, Toowoomba