![]() ![]() Before 2010, no one could’ve ever imagined that a social media platform based on image sharing could be worth millions. It introduced an image-based social platform that users could use to snap, modify their pictures, and tag other users.Īnd it was a huge success. Part of the Meta family today, the platform bought a unique perspective to existing social media practices. Today, we will discuss the evolution of one of the most popular social media icons – the Instagram logo. ![]() Social media platforms rely on them quite heavily to attract and engage users. And we all know who the other one is.Discover How the Current Instagram Logo Evolved from its Initial ConceptĪttractive brand symbols are a requirement for every business that wants to evolve and grow. The whole process, from Labour’s perspective, has been so badly handled that it has turned into a millstone around Starmer’s neck. Starmer’s recruitment of Sue Gray could have been a slam-dunk political triumph. The Gray affair threatens to open up a new weakness in his carapace: policy U-turns and ruthless Machiavellian tactics to dispose of his internal party opponents are one thing, but contributing to an undermining of the civil service code and then refusing to answer questions about his actions? That would be another thing entirely, and if confirmed would speak eloquently to how he might conduct himself in office. The question over Starmer’s personal values and the extent to which he is willing to compromise them in order to gain office is being asked by more and more people, and not just by his traditional, disempowered opponents on the left of his own party. It has even been sustained against criticism that he campaigned – twice – to make Jeremy Corbyn prime minister, a man who Starmer has now deemed so toxic that he cannot even be allowed to be a Labour candidate.īut although such behaviour is understood by the electorate, tolerated and even indulged, it all adds up over time. And it is a reputation that has weathered all the U-turns on policy. Starmer’s reputation as a principled, morally-centred leader, one whose impeccable behaviour stands in stark contrast to the despicable, immoral activities of the government, matters to him. Unless, of course, it were to raise further questions. ![]() If the whole controversy is, as some Labour briefers claim, a storm in a teacup, nothing more than a distraction from the “real” issues, then revealing the exact date on which discussions began will similarly not matter much. Where is the condemnation from Labour of Gray’s apparent refusal to co-operate with the inquiry into whether she broke the rules by agreeing to take a job with Starmer? It is surely legitimate – indeed necessary – for ministers to want to know precisely when she began employment talks with the Leader of the Opposition, and until clarity is brought to bear on the exact timeline of events, voters will be entitled to form their own conclusions. Instead, the danger for the Labour leader is that an accumulation of events turns into a pattern of behaviour, with the damage to his reputation greater than the sum of the parts. Neither will Starmer’s latest planned U-turn – reneging on his pledge to scrap student fees – derail his campaign to win the next general election. ![]() Although her name was briefly in the headlines during the Partygate inquiry, the controversy over the former senior civil servant’s planned appointment as Keir Starmer’s chief of staff is unlikely to be more than a Westminster bubble story. Labour will not lose credibility or votes because of the Sue Gray affair. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |