A fairly lame (i.e. too obvious) parody over on the Creative Review blog eulogises, in the most verbose language, their ‘new identity’. One of the easiest aspects of branding to satirise is the flowery pseudo-scientific language (which often almost does it itself).
In addition, what we really need in the discussion of brands and branding is a deep critical analysis of ‘what?’ and ‘why?’ and what this says about the state of branding, the state of design and the relationship between. What are the social and political implications of a centrally controlled and closed identity for an organisation and the people working for it, and why would certain organisations need, or want, to speak in mono-syllabic, consistent (but consistently dull) voices.