A Million Logos

Read the campaign story

A Million Logos adapted the smile element in Colgate’s identity to reflect individual smiles. The award records describe creator stories, an AI-assisted smile generator, outdoor and online presentations and selected personalised toothpaste packs. The work responded to appearance-based criticism associated with a brand ambassador and invited a wider range of smiles into the brand’s visual language. Ogilvy Malaysia and WPP@CP are credited alongside technology, media and communications collaborators.

Editorial interpretation: the brand changes one of its own controlled assets rather than only asking the audience to accept a slogan about inclusion. Personalisation makes that gesture visible at an individual level. The strongest version of the idea would allow people to participate on their own terms, without requiring a painful story or a public declaration about their appearance.

The opened records establish the campaign by the 2024 awards cycle but do not provide a sufficiently explicit launch year, so the date remains unknown. Reported reach, sentiment and survey figures are not repeated as independently verified evidence. The study distinguishes acceptance of appearance from dental health: a personalised logo is neither a clinical assessment nor proof that bullying or self-consciousness has been reduced.

Change a brand asset in a way people can understand

Identify which part of an identity carries the relevant meaning and what can vary without losing recognition. The change should visibly enact the message rather than require a long explanation of brand guidelines. Test whether viewers understand both the personal contribution and the brand connection. A flexible asset can become a platform, but it should not turn every participant into an unpaid endorsement. Explain where a submitted design may appear and let people keep their version private. Participation is more credible when the organisation gives up some control without quietly expanding its rights over contributors.

Design inclusion without asking people to perform vulnerability

A person may want to create a playful image without describing discrimination or insecurity. Offer a simple participation route that does not require a personal testimony. Avoid categories that label some smiles as normal and others as exceptions. Have participants review how their contribution is described, and moderate comments that invite appearance-based judgement. Do not make public bravery the price of belonging. A campaign about acceptance should be evaluated partly by how comfortable it is to decline, withdraw or participate quietly, not only by the emotional strength of the stories selected for publication.

Treat face-based input as a privacy-sensitive design choice

An image tool needs clear information about what is uploaded, how it is processed, who can access it and how long it remains stored. Minimise collection and avoid unrelated reuse. Do not infer health, identity or emotional state from a smile image. Provide a non-photo alternative where possible, and make permission for public display separate from generating a private result. Test whether participants understand the terms before upload. The technology should support self-expression, not create an unnoticed archive of personal images whose future uses are broader than the invitation people accepted.

A bounded test for another brief

Proposed adaptation: a community arts venue could let consenting adults create a private, hand-drawn variation of an original welcome symbol using simple shapes rather than photographs. Offer an optional public gallery with separate permission and easy removal. Compare a fixed welcome poster with a small set of participant-made versions, asking visitors whether they understand the message and feel represented without being categorised. Do not ask for personal experiences of exclusion or imitate Colgate’s smile logo. This tests visible participation in an institutional asset while avoiding facial-image collection, health implications and pressure to disclose a vulnerable story in exchange for inclusion.

Measure message understanding, voluntary participation, comfort with display choices, removal requests and perceived welcome. Keep these findings separate from claims about mental wellbeing, dental health or the elimination of appearance-based prejudice.

Stop if participation requires distressing disclosure, image permissions are unclear or the work encourages audiences to judge which appearances deserve acceptance.