The dot that cost a fortune: Has GOV.UK lost the plot (again)?

When news broke that GOV.UK had been given a brand refresh by M&C Saatchi at a reported cost of over half a million quid, many British taxpayers let out a collective "Oh FFS!"... Was this really the best use of public money? A new dot, a new hue of blue, and a shinier sans-serif...

That's right folks, for this one-time special cost of just 12 fully trained junior doctors, you too can have a marginally bluer dot!

A lesson in market orientation.

From a "proper marketing" standpoint, it’s baffling. For people who are literally in the business of gaining favour with the public, it never ceases to amaze how little attention politicians give to their audience. One of the first rules of market orientation is: start with the customer. Yet, it's difficult to imagine the British public clamouring for a softer dot and lighter shade of blue, especially given the litany of clusterfucks that governments have managed to rack up during the last decade! A truly market-oriented government might have recognised just how tone-deaf this move would appear to their "market" of citizens.

Ritson’s rule: Don’t rebrand unless you absolutely have to.

One of the world's leading voices in brand management - Mark Ritson - repeatedly warns that rebrands will usually ruin any brand equity that you've managed to muster in consumers' brains. They are generally a massive mistake unless you absolutely have to for legal or commercial reasons. Ok, the UK Government isn't exactly a consumer brand, but it most certainly is a 'brand'. And brands signify more than just the commodity of what they produce. In this instance (digital government services), the GOV.UK identity wasn't broken. Its clean, utilitarian look communicated clarity, authority, and simplicity - all things needed to build familiarity and encourage people to "trust" and remind them to use. 

Reform, DOGE, and the optics of waste

The timing couldn't be worse. With Reform UK gaining ground in local elections and calling out government waste, the optics of a six-figure rebrand are hardly helpful. Much like America’s DOGE office, there's clearly a growing appetite in the UK for holding public spending to account. People are understandably indignant after decades of frivolous spending on everything from duck houses to fancy wallpaper... it doesn't take Columbo to anticipate the inevitable outrage at spending public money on a new dot!

But… Is there method in their madness?

To be fair, this update wasn’t purely cosmetic. According to the GOV.UK Frontend v5.10.0 release notes, the refreshed header—complete with blue background, updated word mark, and 60px height—was part of a broader Frontend v10 update designed to "enhance digital cohesion across government services".

And there’s solid rationale behind the change: GOV.UK’s own accessibility guidance highlights their continual work to meet WCAG 2.2 AA standards, such as improving focus states and refining colour contrast. The refresh, then, is as much about inclusivity and digital compliance as it is brand presence.

Rebuilding trust - but can a font fix it?

A more consistent experience across government services could, in time, improve recognisability and usage of important services that make life easier for people - especially valuable in an online space crowded with scams and misinformation. But, come on. Let’s be realistic: public trust in government is arguably at an all-time low (and I'm old enough to remember when they thought selling weapons to Saddam was a cracking idea!). A fancier dot on your website is not going to magically fix that.

A final word.

Half a million quid... For a dot and a splash of blue?

If anyone at the Cabinet Office is reading, I’d have done it for half that. Just sayin' 😉