只用一本书提高英语听力能力!重温经典名著双语阅读小编推荐:跟着纪录片学英语不背单词和语法,轻松学英语
返回列表 回复 发帖

[英伦广角] 【整理】Issue 104 英政府商业办公室新标志被恶搞

提高英语听力能力 找对方法很重要!

[英伦广角] 【整理】Issue 104 英政府商业办公室新标志被恶搞

user posted image
More than meets the eye


More 4 News discovers that when you turn the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce on its side you might just see something else.



【电信1】 RealVideo / mp3

【电信2】 RealVideo / mp3

【网通/教育网】 RealVideo / mp3

点击进入英伦广角整理稿汇总页面

点击进入多主题版块听写规则(新手必读)

 

【整理】Issue 104  ---jeanneleaf

 

Now the government spends 142,000,000 pounds a year on advertising and branding, on things like this, which is the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce. But is it money well spent? Some people have been seeing things in the design that the designers may not have intended. As Rags Martel reports.

 

Introducing the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce, but turn it on its side, and you just might see why this isn't the best thoughtout rebranding exercise, particularly considering it will be this way up when displayed on pens.

 

I must say the first time I saw it, I laughed out loud. It's very funny. I think the logo should probably be scrapped almost immediately, and I think that's probably what the OGC are doing. I mean it's a bit of embarrassment, it's a funny episode. But that logo can never be taken seriously. If this is the corporate thought,the OGC, they are in trouble.

 

14000 pounds was spent on the logo, expensive, especially for a government agency which aims to improve value for money to the tax payer.

 

They are a bit embarrassed because when I turn it like that, what could you see?

 

Oh, not very good. That's not very good at all.

 

Cost 14 grand

 

Is this a joke?

 

No, it's not a joke.

 

I think that's a bit of a joke.

 

I think it is in color. It's just a logo.

 

Or, what if I turn it like this.

 

That looks like ha ha ha.

 

Almost obscene.

 

Now some people could say that they have dirty minds, because they are just seeing the naughty side of a logo. In fact, there's something in the brain which is called the amidol that gives you an interpretation of something from your points of view, rather what it actually is. The fact is, in this case, you know, it is what it is. And what it looks like, what it rather sticks out like a sour farm and that being generous.

 

The OGC refused to comment on the logo, saying only that it had refocused its priorities for delivering high quality public services. But it can take some comfort that this isn't the first logo cock-up.

 

And even in the controversial London Olympic logo, apparently some people see Lisa Simpson doing something unspeakable with Bart. The moral of the logo story yet seems always look at it both ways.

 

Now, we do enjoy ourselves here. And if you didn't quite get that you can see it again on our website at the address on the screen around now, more4news.

[ 本帖最后由 jeanneleaf 于 2008-6-12 15:22 编辑 ]

普特在线文本比较普特在线听音查字普特在线拼写检查普特文本转音频

支持普特英语听力就多多发帖吧!您们的参与是对斑竹工作最大的肯定与支持!如果您觉得还不错,推荐给周围的朋友吧~

Homework

Now the government spends 142000000 pounds yet on advertising and bronzing on things like this which is the now logo for Office Government Commas. but is the money well spent? Some people have been seeing things in the design that the designer may not have intended. *** reports.

 

Introducing the new logo for the Office Government Commas. but turn it on its side, and you just might see why this isn't the best thought-out with branding exercise, particularly considering be this way up when this played on pens.

 

I must say the first time I saw it I laughed out loud. It’s very funny. I think the logo should probably be scrabbled almost immediately, I think that is probably what the OGC are doing. I mean it's a bit embarrassment, it's a funny episode. But that logo can never be taken seriously. If this is the *** the OGC they are in trouble.

 

14 thousand pounds was spent on the logo. Expensive especially for a government agency which aims to improve the value of money to the tax payer.

 

This is embarrassed because when I turn it like that, what do you see?

 

Oh, not very good. That's not very good at all.

 

Cost 14 grounds.

 

Is it a joke?

 

No, it's not a joke.

 

I thought that was a joke.

 

I think it should be coloured. It's a logo.

 

Or, what if I turn it like this.

 

That looks like ha ha ha.

 

Now somebody could say that they have dirty minds, because they just seeing the naughty side of the logo. In fact, something in the brain which is called "the meeg dealer" that gives you the interpretation of something from your point of view rather than what it actually is. The fact is in that case, you know, it is what it is. And what it looks like, it's rather like a saw thumb, and not being generous.

 

The OGC refuse comment on the logo, saying only that it had refocused on priority of delivering high quality services. But it can take some comfort that this isn't the first logo cock up. And even in the controversial London Olympic logo, apparently somebody sees that Lisa Simpson is doing something unspeakable with Bart. The moral of the logo story seems looked always both ways.

 

Yes, we do enjoy OGC here. And if you didn't quite get that you can see it again on our website.

 

 

 

1

评分次数

立即获取| 免费注册领取外教体验课一节

hw

Now the government spends 142 million pounds a year on advertising and branding, on things like this, which is the new logo for the Office of Gventment Commerce, but isn`t money well spent? Some people have been seeing things in the design, that designers may not have intended. As // reports.

 

Introducing the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce, but turn it on its side and you just might see well this is the best thought out re-branding exercise, particularly considering will be this way up, when this planed on pens.

 

I must say the first I saw it, I laughed out loud, it`s, it`s very funny. I think the logo should probably be scrabbled, almost immediately, and I think that`s probably what the OGC are doing, I mean it`s a bit embarrassment, it`s a funny episode, a bad logo can never be taken seriously. If this is a // OGC that are in trouble.

 

14,000 pounds were spent on the logo, expensive especially for government agency which aims to improve value for money to the tax payer.

 

"They are embarrassed, because when I turn it like that, what you see"
"Oh, not very good. That`s not very good at all, you know."
"Cost 14 ground."
"It`s a joke."
"No, it`s not a joke."
"But it looks like a joke."
"I think it could be coloured. It`s just a logo."
"Or, what if I turn it like this?"
"That looks like, ha ha ha ha ..."
"Almost //."

 

Now some people could say that they have dirty minds because they just seeing the naughty side of the logo, in fact there`s something in the brand which is called ///, that gives you interpretation of somehting, from your point of view, rather than what actually is. Er, the fact is, in this case, er, you know, it is what it is, and what it looks like? What a rather stick // like a ///thumb, and not being generous.

 

The OGC refused to comment on the logo, saying only that it had refocused its priorities for delivering high quality public services, but you can take some comfort that this is the first logo //.

 

And even in the controversial London Olympic logo, apparently some people see Lisa Simpson doing something  unspeakable with Bart. The moral of the logo story it seems or is looked at it // ways.

 

Now, we do enjoy else here, and if you didn`t quite get that, you can see it again on our website at/// from screen around now, more for...

实现无障碍英语沟通

hw

Now the government spends 142 million pounds a year on advertising and branding, on things like this, which is the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce, but isn`t money well spent? Some people have been seeing things in the design, that designers may not have intended. As // reports. Introducing the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce, but turn it on its side and you just might see why this isn’t the best sought out re-branding exercise, particularly considering when this way up, when this planed on pens. I must say the first I saw it, I laughed out loud, it`s, it`s very funny. I think the logo should probably be scrabbled, almost immediately, and I think that`s probably what the OGC are doing, I mean it`s a bit embarrassment, it`s a funny episode, a bad logo can never be taken seriously. If this is the corpse of the OGC they are in trouble. 14,000 pounds were spent on the logo, expensive especially for a government agency which aims to improve value for money to the tax payer. "They are embarrassed, because when I turn it like that, what you see" "Oh, not very good. That`s not very good at all, you know." "Cost 14 ground." "It`s a joke." "No, it`s not a joke." "But it looks like a joke." "I think it could be coloured. It`s just a logo." "Or, what if I turn it like this?" "That looks like, ha ha ha ha ..." "Almost //." Now some people could say that they have dirty minds because they just seeing the naughty side of the logo, in fact there`s something in the brand which is called ///, that gives you interpretation of something, from your point of view, rather than what actually is. Er, the fact is, in this case, er, you know, it is what it is, and what it looks like rather sticks out like a sore thumb, and not being generous. The OGC refused to comment on the logo, saying only that it had refocused its priorities for delivering high quality public services, but you can take some comfort that this isn’t the first logo corn. And even in the controversial London Olympic logo, apparently some people see Lisa Simpson doing something unspeakable with Bart. The moral of the logo story it seems or is looked at it varies. Now, we do enjoy else here, and if you didn`t quite get that, you can see it again on our website at/// from screen around now, more for...
口译专员推荐—>口译训练软件IPTAM口译通

homework

Now the government spends 142 million pounds a year on advertising and branding, on things like this, which is the new logo for the Office of Gventment Commerce, but isn`t money well spent? Some people have been seeing things in the design, that designers may not have intended. As // reports.

 

Introducing the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce, but turn it on its side and you just might see well this isn’t the best thought out re-branding exercise, particularly considering will be this way up, when this played on pens.

 

I must say the first I saw it, I laughed out loud, it`s, it`s very funny. I think the logo should probably be scrapped, almost immediately, and I think that`s probably what the OGC are doing, I mean it`s a bit embarrassment, it`s a funny episode, but that logo can never be taken seriously. If this is the // source of the OGC they are in trouble.

 

14,000 pounds were spent on the logo, expensive especially for government agency which aims to improve value for money to the tax payer.

 

"They are embarrassed, because when I turn it like that, what would you see"
"Oh, not very good. That`s not very good at all, you know."
"Cost 14 ground."
"It`s a joke."
"No, it`s not a joke."
"But it looks like a joke."
"I think it could be coloured. It`s just a logo."
"Or, what if I turn it like this?"
"That looks like, ha ha ha ha ..."
"Almost obscene."

 

Now some people could say that they have dirty minds because they just seeing the naughty side of the logo, in fact there`s something in the brain which is called amiga dealers, that gives you interpretation of somehting, from your point of view, rather than what it actually is. Er, the fact is, in this case, er, you know, it is what it is, and what it looks like? What a rather stick out like a //, and that being generous.

 

The OGC refused to comment on the logo, saying only that it had refocused its priorities for delivering high quality public services, but you can take some comfort that this is the first logo caco.

 

And even in the controversial London Olympic logo, apparently some people see Lisa Simpson doing something unspeakable with Bars. The moral of the logo story it seems or is looked at it // ways.

 

Now, we do enjoy else here, and if you didn`t quite get that, you can see it again on our website as is addressed on the screen around now, more for...

 

[ 本帖最后由 iceblaze 于 2008-4-28 08:43 编辑 ]

On tomo2004

============

 

Now the government spends 142000000 pounds a year on advertising and branding, on things like this, which is the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce. but is the money well spent? Some people have been seeing things in the design that the designers may not have intended. As Rags Martel reports.

 

Introducing the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce, but turn it on its side, and you just might see why this isn't the best thoughtout rebranding exercise, particular considering will be this way up when displayed untensed.

 

I must say the first time I saw it, I laughed out loudly. It’s very funny. I think the logo should probably be strafed almost immediately, and I think that is probably what the OGC are doing. I mean it's a bit of embarrassment, it's a funny episode. But that logo can never be taken seriously. If this is the company sort of, the OGC they are in trouble.

 

14000 pounds was spent on the logo. Expensive especially for a government agency which aims to improve / value for money to the tax payer.

 

That's really embarrassed because when I turn it like that, could you see?

 

Oh, not very good. That's not very good at all.

 

Cost 14 grands.

 

Is it a joke?

 

No, it's not a joke.

 

I think that's probably a joke.

 

I think it is in color. It's just a logo.

 

Or, what if I turn it like this.

 

That looks like ha ha ha.

 

Almost obscene.

 

Now some people could say that they have dirty minds, because they just see the naughty side of the logo. In fact, that something in the brain which is called the amidola that gives you an interpretation or something from your point of view rather than what it actually is. The fact is in this case, you know, it is what it is. And what it looks like, what it rather sticks out like a soft fun and that being generous.

 

The OGC refused to comment on the logo, saying only that it had refocused its priorities for delivering high quality public services. But it can take some comfort that this isn't the first logo cock-up.

 

And even in the controversial London Olympic logo, apparently some people see/ / Lisa Simpson / doing something unspeakable with Bart. The moral of the logo story yet seems always look at it both ways.

 

Now, we do enjoy ourselves here. And if you didn't quite get that you can see it again on our website. I give you the address on the screen...

[ 本帖最后由 Hector 于 2008-4-28 10:26 编辑 ]
You're waiting for a train, a train that will take you far away. You know where you hope this train will take you, but you can't be sure. But it doesn't matter - because we'll be together.


Go the extra mile!

And some more pix mangled visual metaphor

 

 

 

 

附件: 您所在的用户组无法下载或查看附件
You're waiting for a train, a train that will take you far away. You know where you hope this train will take you, but you can't be sure. But it doesn't matter - because we'll be together.


Go the extra mile!
实现无障碍英语沟通

努力学

大这的英语好厉害哟,我要加油啦
普特听力大课堂

on Hector

just a few lines here:

 

 I think the logo should probably be scraped almost immediately


The moral of the logo story it seems always look at it both ways.

好栏目推荐之美国口语俚语

Now the government spends 142000000 pounds a year on advertising and branding, on things like this, which is the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce. but is the money well spent? Some people have been seeing things in the design that the designers may not have intended. As Rags Martel reports.

 

Introducing the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce, but turn it on its side, and you just might see why this isn't the best thoughtout rebranding exercise, particular considering will be this way up when displayed untensed.

 

I must say the first time I saw it, I laughed out loudly. It’s very funny. I think the logo should probably be scraped almost immediately, and I think that is probably what the OGC are doing. I mean it's a bit of embarrassment, it's a funny episode. But that logo can never be taken seriously. If this is the company sort of, the OGC they are in trouble.

 

1400 pounds was spent on the logo. Expensive especially for a government agency which aims to improve / value for money to the tax payer.

 

That's really embarrassed because when I turn it like that, what could you see?

 

Oh, not very good. That's not very good at all.

 

Cost 14 grands.

 

Is it a joke?

 

No, it's not a joke.

 

I think that's probably a joke.

 

I think it is in color. It's just a logo.

 

Or, what if I turn it like this.

 

That looks like ha ha ha.

 

Almost obscene.

 

Now some people could say that they have dirty minds, because they just see the naughty side of the logo. In fact, that something in the brain which is called the amidola that gives you an interpretation or something from your point of view rather than what it actually is. The fact is in this case, you know, it is what it is. And what it looks like, what it rather sticks out like a soft fun and that being generous.

 

The OGC refused to comment on the logo, saying only that it had refocused its priorities for delivering high quality public services. But it can take some comfort that this isn't the first logo cock-up.

 

And even in the controversial London Olympic logo, apparently some people see/ / Lisa Simpson / doing something unspeakable with Bart. The moral of the logo story yet seems always look at it both ways.

 

Now, we do enjoy ourselves here. And if you didn't quite get that you can see it again on our website. I give you the address on the screen...

 

on Hector

Now the government spends 142000000 pounds a year on advertising and branding, on things like this, which is the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce. but is the money well spent? Some people have been seeing things in the design that the designers may not have intended. As Rags Martel reports.

 

Introducing the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce, but turn it on its side, and you just might see why this isn't the best thoughtout rebranding exercise, particular considering will be this way up when displayed untensed.

 

I must say the first time I saw it, I laughed out loudly. It’s very funny. I think the logo should probably be scraped almost immediately, and I think that is probably what the OGC are doing. I mean it's a bit of embarrassment, it's a funny episode. But that logo can never be taken seriously. If this is the company sort of, the OGC they are in trouble.

 

1400 pounds was spent on the logo. Expensive especially for a government agency which aims to improve / value for money to the tax payer.

 

That's really embarrassed because when I turn it like that, what could you see?

 

Oh, not very good. That's not very good at all.

 

Cost 14 grands.

 

Is it a joke?

 

No, it's not a joke.

 

I think that's probably a joke.

 

I think it is in color. It's just a logo.

 

Or, what if I turn it like this.

 

That looks like ha ha ha.

 

Almost obscene.

 

Now some people could say that they have dirty minds, because they just see the naughty side of the logo. In fact, that something in the brain which is called the amidola that gives you an interpretation or something from your point of view rather than what it actually is. The fact is in this case, you know, it is what it is. And what it looks like, what it rather sticks out like a soft fun and that being generous.

 

The OGC refused to comment on the logo, saying only that it had refocused its priorities for delivering high quality public services. But it can take some comfort that this isn't the first logo cock-up.

 

And even in the controversial London Olympic logo, apparently some people see/ / Lisa Simpson / doing something unspeakable with Bart. The moral of the logo story yet seems always look at it both ways.

 

Now, we do enjoy ourselves here. And if you didn't quite get that you can see it again on our website. I give you the address on the screen...

 

Homework

Now the government spends 142 million pounds a year on advertising and branding, on things like this, which is the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce. but is the money well spent? Some people have been seeing things in the design that the designers may not have intended. As??reports. Introducing the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce, but turn it on its side, and you just might see why this isn't the best thoughtout rebranding exercise, particular considering will be this way up when displayed ??. I must say the first time I saw it, I laughed out loudly. It’s very funny. I think the logo should probably be straped almost immediately, and I think that is probably what the OGC are doing. I mean it's a bit embarrassment, it's a funny episode. But that logo can never be taken seriously. If this is ???? the OGC they are in trouble. 14,000 pounds was spent on the logo. Expensive especially for a government agency which aims to improve / value for money to the tax payer. That's really embarrassed because when I turn it like that, what would you see? Oh, not very good. ha ha ha, That's not very good at all name. Is it a joke? No, it's not a joke. I think ??? a joke. I think it is in color. It's just a logo. Or, what if I turn it like this. That looks like ha ha ha. Almost the sea. ha ha ha ha . Now some people could say that they have dirty minds, because they just see the naughty side of the logo. In fact, that something in the brain which is called the ?? that gives you an interpretation or something from your point of view rather than what it actually is. The fact is in this case, you know, it is what it is. And what it looks like, what it rather sticks out like a?? and that being generous. The OGC refused to comment on the logo, saying only that it had refocused its priorities for delivering high quality public services. But it can take some comfort that this isn't the first logo ???. And even in the controversial London Olympic logo, apparently some people see?? doing something unspeakable with Bart. The moral of the logo story yet seems always look at it both ways. Now, we do enjoy ourselves here. And if you didn't quite get that you can see it again on our website. I give you the address on the screen...
Unblock what you feel blocked, and never trouble trouble till trouble troubles you!
每天半小时 轻松提高英语口语

homework:

Now the governments spends 142 million pounds a year on advertising and branding on things like this, which is the new logo for the office of government commerce. But is it the money worth spent? some people have been seeing things on the design that designers may not be intended. as /reports.

 

introducing the new logo for the office of government Commerce. but turn it into its side, you just might see this isnt the best of thought-out way of rebranding exercise. particularly considering be this way up will display on pens.

 

I must say that the first time I saw it, I laughed out loud, its very funny. I think the logo should probably be scraped almost immediately. and I think thats probably the OGC doing. admitting its a bit embarrassment, its a funny episode. but that logo can never be taken seriously. if this is the Corps of the OGC, theyre in trouble.

 

40,000 pounds were spent on the logo, expensive, especially for government agency which aims to improve value for money to the taxpayer.

theres would be embarrassing, (how could that be?) because when I turn it like that, what would you see? oh, not very good. thats not very good at all. no

 

cost 40 grands, no, its not a joke. I think this would be a joke.

I think it would be a column, its just a logo. What if I turn it like this, that looks like , almost awkward scene,

 

now somebody could say that they have dirty minds, because theyve just seen the naughty side of logo. In fact, there is something in the brain which is called the amidola that gives you an interpretation of something for your point of view. Rather than actually it is. the fact is, in this case, you know, it is what it is. and what looks like , and rather speak out loud so fun, and thats be generous.

 

the OGC refused to comment on this logo, saying only it had refocused its priorities for delivering high quality public services. but it can take some comfort that this isnt the first logo cock-up, and even in the controversial London Olympic Logo, apparently, somebody say Lisa Simpson doing something unspeakable with Bart. The moral of the logo story it seems always look at both ways,

Now, we do enjoy ourselves here. if you dont quite get that, you can see it again on our website at the address on the screen around now. more 4 news

 

Stay hungry,Stay foolish!Never afraid of trying!

On Rosalie Yeon

 

Now the government spends 142,000,000 pounds a year on advertising and branding, on things like this, which is the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce. But is the money well spent? Some people have been seeing things in the design that the designers may not have intended. As Rags Martel reports.

 

Introducing the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce, but turn it on its side, and you just might see why this isn't the best thoughtout rebranding exercise, particularly considering will be this way up when displayed untensed.

 

I must say the first time I saw it, I laughed out loudly. It’s very funny. I think the logo should probably be scrapped almost immediately, and I think that’s probably what the OGC are doing. I mean it's a bit of embarrassment, it's a funny episode. But that logo can never be taken seriously. If this is the corporate thoughts of the OGC, they are in trouble.

 

1400 pounds was spent on the logo, expensive, especially for a government agency which aims to improve value for money to the tax payer.

 

They are embarrassed because when I turn it like that, what could you see?

 

Oh, not very good. That's not very good at all.

 

Cost 14 grand

 

Is it a joke?

 

No, it's not a joke.

 

I think that's probably a joke.

 

I think it is in color. It's just a logo.

 

Or, what if I turn it like this.

 

That looks like ha ha ha.

 

Almost obscene.

 

Now some people could say that they have dirty minds, because they just see the naughty side of the logo. In fact, that something in the brain which is called the amidola that gives you an interpretation or something from your point of view or what it actually is. The fact is, in this case, you know, it is what it is. And what it looks like, what it rather sticks out like a soft fun and that being generous.

 

The OGC refused to comment on the logo, saying only that it had refocused its priorities for delivering high quality public services. But it can take some comfort that this isn't the first logo cock-up.

 

And even in the controversial London Olympic logo, apparently some people see Lisa Simpson doing something unspeakable with Bart. The moral of the logo story yet seems always look at it both ways.

 

Now, we do enjoy ourselves here. And if you didn't quite get that you can see it again on our website. I give you the address on the screen...

 

真是改不出来了。。

[ 本帖最后由 axiuluo20055 于 2008-4-29 12:22 编辑 ]
口译专员推荐—>口译训练软件IPTAM口译通

HOMEWORK

Now the government spends 142000000 pounds a year on advertising and branding, on things like this, which is the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce, but is the money well spent? Some people have been seeing things in the design that the designers may not have intended. As Rags Martel reports.

 

Introducing the new logo for the Office of Government Commerce, but turn it on its side, and you just might see why this isn't the best thought-out re-branding exercise, particular considering will be this way up when this planed on pens.

 

I must say the first time I saw it, I laughed out loudly. It’s very funny. I think the logo should probably be scraped almost immediately, and I think that is probably what the OGC are doing. I mean it's a bit of embarrassment, it's a funny episode. But that logo can never be taken seriously. If this is the company sort of, the OGC they are in trouble.

 

1400 pounds was spent on the logo, expensive. Especially for a government agency which aims to improve value for money to the tax payer.

 

That's really embarrassed because when I turn it like that, what could you see?

 

Oh, not very good. That's not very good at all.

 

Cost 14 grands.

 

Is it a joke?

 

No, it's not a joke.

 

I think that's probably a joke.

 

I think it is in color. It's just a logo.

 

Or, what if I turn it like this.

 

That looks like ha ha ha.

 

Almost obscene.

 

Now some people could say that they have dirty minds, because they just see the naughty side of the logo. In fact, that something in the brain which is called the eidola that gives you an interpretation or something from your point of view rather than what it actually is. The fact is in this case, you know, it is what it is. And what it looks like, what it rather sticks out like a soft fun and that being generous.

 

The OGC refused to comment on the logo, saying only that it had refocused its priorities for delivering high quality public services. But it can take some comfort that this isn't the first logo cock-up.

 

And even in the controversial London Olympic logo, apparently some people see/ / Lisa Simpson / doing something unspeakable with Bart. The moral of the logo story seems always look at it both ways.

 

Now, we do enjoy ourselves here. And if you didn't quite get that you can see it again on our website. I give you the address on the screen.

 

返回列表