On the Origins of Syfy – Update
A follow-up to "RIP SCI FI" in which we explore the people behind the rebrand "Syfy"
Geniuses? Sci Fi Channel Pres Dave Howe, left, Exec VP of Original Programming Mark Stern and VP of Creative Michael Engleman at Sci Fi Channel upfront March 16 where "Syfy" rebrand was announced. (Brian McDermott)
The initial group identified by The New York Times as associated with "Syfy"— after the Sci Fi Channel announced its name change at March's upfronts— was Landor Associates, the giant branding agency which became the focus of initial scorn.
Self-proclaimed "best branding expert on the planet" Rob Frankel took Landor to task for coming up with what he termed "hopelessly stupid and - you should pardon the pun - incredibly alienating new moniker." Landor (whom he referred to as "hacks") got the brunt of his invective, but he saved some for Sci Fi's execs: "Much of the blame should be placed at the feet of SciFi's corporate managers, who obviously have no concept of what branding is or does."
RIP SCI FI; WTF IS SYFY?
Rebranding of Sci Fi Channel to "Syfy" shows the channel is bereft of imagination.
A bunch of mindless jerks
"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy defines the marketing division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation as "a bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes"
Apparently, the same can now be said of the marketing bozos at the channel-soon-to-be-formerly-named-SCI-FI (or is it "Sci Fi" or "SciFi"?) See, some branding genius (London's Landor Associates) Michael Engleman, hired last year by NBC-Universal was convinced that the term "Sci Fi" had a bad connotation: it bespoke of complicated stuff, like science... and um, fiction. And people who liked that kinda thing were frankly undesirable.
So said one of the Sci Fi Channel's founder (and now "TV historian") Tim Brooks:
The name Sci Fi has been associated with geeks and dysfunctional, antisocial boys in their basements with video games and stuff like that, as opposed to the general public and the female audience in particular.
(Because, of course, you can't build a channel identity on that sort of thing!)
See, the problem—contrary to critics—wasn't that the shows they broadcast sucked, or that there weren't enough compelling reasons to watch the channel, it's that the network name wasn't cool enough.
Solution? A new name!
