Five controversial charity rebrands – and why they backfired

RSPCA logo

Charities are set up to help those in need. That’s why so many of us donate, after all.

But significant sums are also being spent on things other than frontline services, including rebrands dreamed up in boardrooms and overseen by PR companies.

This week, the RSPCA was the latest charity to follow suit. It was immediately criticised for its “woke” rebrand, accompanied by a marketing blitz featuring a sad-looking cow and a snail narrowly avoiding being stepped on.

Chris Sherwood, the charity’s chief executive, said the campaign had been launched to help people realise all animals have feelings and emotions. The rebrand costs amounted to fewer than one per cent of its annual welfare budget (which runs to tens of millions), he added.

But critics were quick to take aim at the organisation, accusing it of suggesting farmers were mistreating their animals and overstepping its role as the protector of the nation’s pets.

So, with the topic back in the spotlight, here are some other examples of controversial charity rebrands in recent years.

The Royal National Institute for Deaf People (RNID) 

Spent £260,000 on a rebrand that included a name change that didn’t last a decade

To mark its 100th anniversary in 2011, The Royal National Institute for Deaf People (RNID) rebranded – changing its name to Action on Hearing Loss.

At the time, it said it had undertaken extensive brand research with focus groups of staff, supporters and service users before making the decision to change. It said the new name would better describe the breadth of support it provided for people with all types of hearing loss.

But in 2020, it changed its name back again after a poll of 6,000 people revealed the original was more popular. The second rebrand cost a further £69,000.

Brand expert Dan Dufour, who was involved in the second rebrand, says: “I imagine, in the first instance, the charity didn’t consult enough with its core members.

“They ended up alienating a large part of their core audience, basically because they removed the word deaf, which is an important part of people’s identity.

“The new name implied that it wanted to help get rid of deafness or hearing loss, and not get rid of the barriers and problems in society. It resulted in a decade of decline for the charity.”

Nordoff and Robbins 

Added ‘and’ to its name at as part of a £172,000 rebrand

Music therapy organisation Nordoff Robbins spent more than £170,000 on a rebrand in 2023 that included adding the word ‘and’ to its name in 2023.

Established in 1976, the charity was named after its two founders, American composer and pianist Paul Nordoff and British special education teacher Clive Robbins.

But after a 12-month period working with two external marketing agencies, it announced its new name would be Nordoff and Robbins.

The charity told Civil Society News it spent £172,000 on the rebrand. This included the change in name, as well as a new logo and website. Nordoff and Robbins, which had an income of £4.1 million in 2021, said it decided to rebrand to “express our ambition and engage the public”.

“Making the decision to go through a brand reposition is never taken lightly, but when the evidence presented is clear, you have to take action,” said Nadra Shah, director of engagement and communications.

“Our research told us that the need for music therapy is currently at its highest, but public understanding of the benefits is low. To protect and increase our services we had to change the way in which we communicated our work and its impact. We now have a brand that will help us clearly express our ambition and engage the public.”

Leukaemia & Lymphoma Research 

Spent £125,000 on a rebrand that lasted five years

In a clear example of ill-thought-out branding, this cancer charity changed its name twice in the space of five years.

Originally called Leukaemia & Lymphoma Research, it rebranded to Bloodwise in 2015. But despite spending some £125,000 on the name change, it later admitted it was confusing to the public and disliked among staff.

In 2020, the charity decided to rebrand to Blood Cancer UK, at an undisclosed cost, paid for by supporters.

Its former CEO Gemma Peters said at the time that while she had been determined not to alter the name again, carrying on as it was like “driving with the handbrake on”.

In a blog post, she wrote that the charity’s income was declining when others’ coffers were growing.

“The name Bloodwise wasn’t just failing to communicate what we did, it was giving people the impression we did something else,” she said.

“We’re lucky that we have a small group of supporters who were so passionate about the importance of good communications that they kindly donated enough money to cover the cost of changing our name. That means none of the money they [fundraisers] raise will be going towards the cost of the name change.”

Helen de Soyza, deputy director of communications at Blood Cancer UK, told the Telegraph: “Changing the organisation’s name in 2020 was not something we did lightly, and we made the decision in full consultation with our community.

“Research around the previous name showed significant misunderstanding of what we did and, as a result, the people who needed us weren’t finding us and were missing out on vital information and support.

“A small group of supporters recognised the limitations of the name and donated restricted funds so that none of our general donations needed to be used for this project.  

“As Blood Cancer UK, people with blood cancer have more easily understood who we are and what we do, and as a result we’ve managed to reach and support many more people affected by leukaemia, lymphoma and myeloma than before.”

Royal British Legion 

Rebranded at a cost of £100,000, including redesigning its logo

In 2021, the Royal British Legion spent £100,000 on a total rebrand that saw the charity adopt a new logo in a move condemned by some veterans as a “gross misuse” of money.

The new design featured the red poppy associated with the organisation relocated to the middle of its logo – doubling up as the B.

Critics pointed out that the funds were spent at a time when thousands of servicemen were homeless.

At the time, Andy Price, who runs the Veterans Hub in Weymouth, Dorset, a support group that helps former servicemen, said: “I am dumbfounded. Spending £100,000 on a brand change is a gross misuse of their funds and unforgivable at all levels.”

A spokesperson for The Royal British Legion told The Telegraph: “Our previous brand was designed more than 30 years before we rebranded in 2021, and before any of today’s digital channels existed, therefore it was no longer fit for purpose in the modern world.

“In addition, research showed that whilst the Legion is well known for Remembrance, understanding of our welfare work was dropping year on year and the new brand identity took action to address this.

“We take the use of charitable funds extremely seriously and we made this significant investment to ensure we can reach and support more members of the Armed Forces community in the future by making it simpler for them to find us and understand who we are and what we do.”

Citizens Advice 

Dropped ‘Bureau’ from its name as part of a rebrand that cost £1m

In 2015, the umbrella charity known as the Citizens Advice Bureau spent £1 million on a rebrand and name change that saw its title stripped back to Citizens Advice.

Out of this staggering sum, it spent £215,000 on research and development and £300,000 on changing office signs across 3,000 locations.

The charity said it decided to drop the word Bureau after discovering users did not understand its connotations, seeing it as overly old-fashioned and irrelevant.

It also redeveloped its website to make it easier for those who used English as a second language and increasingly accessible for people with disabilities.

Part of the rebranding involved replacing the old CAB logo with a speech bubble to “convey a more personable, approachable tone and identity”.

“They would have done research to show that the word Bureau didn’t work anymore,” Dufour says.

“People need to know that branding isn’t just a website and logo, but can be a complete overhaul, and this does cost a lot for large organisations.

“But still, charities need to be aware of costs so they take the public with them.”

The Telegraph contacted each of the five charities identified above for comment

Play The Telegraph’s brilliant range of Puzzles – and feel brighter every day. Train your brain and boost your mood with PlusWord, the Mini Crossword, the fearsome Killer Sudoku and even the classic Cryptic Crossword.