There's a part of me, yes, that says, 'These things happen - live with it.'
There's a (peaceful) part of me that says, 'Bring on the revolution...'.
There's a (very small) part of me that says, 'Microsoft are just great and hugely generous, and Monkseaton High is in their debt, etc. etc.'
And there's a (voluble) part of me that says, 'More people see the outside of the building than will ever see the inside. It is ugly. Microsoft may be giving grants, but that's a pittance beside what they earn (and what they hope to get from exploiting such grant-giving - for example, more kudos to put money into a relatively deprived area than an affluent one). This is supposed to appeal to young adults, not children. And four blocks on the roof will actually communicate the brand identity better than the scattergun effect anyway (as this will replicate the logo more faithfully).'
I'm right, and you all know it!
Put yourselves in Microsoft's shoes. Is it better for them to:
1. Identify with an act of aesthetic vandalism which will alienate at least as many people as it attracts, so that any positives are mitigated by a 'shame about the exterior'?
2. Celebrate the positives their educational grant brings, in a bold building, with their logo in proportion on the roof, but minimal environmental impact beyond that?
Look, I lived for three years up the road from the McDonalds UK Headquarters in East Finchley. They called it McDonalds University. The road leading into it was even named College Road. Beyond a reasonable logo, there was no sign that this was a global company. If McDonalds doesn't need the show, why does Microsoft?
'Nuff said. I've made my point. Off now to use my Mac. It's just the right height to prop my book up at an aesthetically pleasing angle.