Gap appears to be considering ditching its new logo, unveiled on Monday, after a storm of social media protest.  The retailer has already removed the logo from its Facebook page and launched a hurried crowdsourcing project, asking customers to submit their own logo ideas.

Seriously can you crowdsource a new logo on the fly like that? And really why bother when your customers ALL seem to love your existing logo that always seems a bit like Gap’s formula for clothes (t-shirts, jeans and a few hoodies) and that isn’t broken either.

All this has happened less than a week after Gap revealed the new logo, which was to replace its classic solid blue logo of 20 years. The revamped version didn’t even get a chance to make it to the UK before it was shot down in digital flames.

Gap was caught on the back foot after the  logo was almost universally reviled by customers who have posted thousands of comments on Facebook, Twitter and blogs, venting their displeasure.

Gap had said the new logo, created by Laird & Partners, was part of “how the brand is evolving” and was an effort to align it more closely with its customers.

In an article on Huffington Post, Marka Hansen, president of Gap North America, said: “We chose this design as it’s more contemporary and current. It honours our heritage through the blue box while still taking it forward.

“Now, given the passionate outpouring from customers that followed, we’ve decided to engage in the dialogue, take their feedback on board, and work together as we move ahead and evolve to the next phase of Gap.”

The storm of protest is not only almost unprecedented in relation to a brand redesigning its corporate image, but  has also proved incredibly effective and powerful. In less than a week, Gap has gone from quietly unveiling its new logo, to getting ready to ditch it.

The affair has echoes of Tropicana’s disastrous rebranding that saw sales slide 20% and prompted the Pepsico brand into a speedy reversal after two months.

Yesterday, Gap posted this message on Facebook: “Thanks for everyone’s input on the new logo! We’ve had the same logo for 20+ years, and this is just one of the things we’re changing. We know this logo created a lot of buzz and we’re thrilled to see passionate debates unfolding! So much so we’re asking you to share your designs. We love our version, but we’d like to see other ideas. Stay tuned for details in the next few days on this crowdsourcing project.”

The about-face has come after comments such as these were posted on Twitter: @navarrotells yep – “New logo lost all brand essence”; @superboxmonkey – “New Gap logo looks as if it were done in Microsoft Word”; @spydergrrl – “Seen new Gap logo yet? I think it definitely captures essence of this generation, that is: meh”; @charinetan –”You don’t frakking crowdsource your brand logo. Disgusting”.

There were hundreds of similar comments on Gap’s Facebook page, 99% of which were negative: “That new logo sucks, sorry! I like the old one better”; “How ugly! Bring back the blue square”; “Please just keep the same logo that is sophisticated and it will save time…otherwise it cheapens my clothes!”; and “Go back to the original logo” are common.

Many Facebook and Twitter users talk about Gap’s 20 year old logo being a classic and how the new logo “cheapens the brand” while others like Cheryl-Anne Whitlock ask: “Why fix something if it’s not broken?”.

As with the BP oil spill, which gave life to the spoof Twitter account @BPGlobalPR, Gap is also facing a spoofer of its own in @GapLogo, which has racked up 3,400 followers on the back of tweets such as this: “People, I may be ‘ugly’ but I think we can all agree that spec work/crowd-sourcing isn’t the solution. What is the solution? More scotch.”

In addition to spoof accounts, Twitter users have created sites where you can make your own Gap logo with more than 5,000 logos of their own already made. The site Your Logo Makes Me Barf is offering a $50 iTunes gift card to whoever can come up with the funniest caption to accompany Gap’s new image.

Some have been asking the question whether it was Gap’s original plan to crowdsource the project. It seems unlikely. A Gap spokesman said that the retailer had “always planned to use the new logo campaign online and in holiday ads before rolling out fully in 2011″. Those plans are, however, now on hold.

Crowdsourcing is fine, but does anyone really think a company can hand responsibility for creating a new logo to the crowd? Designers are dead against such initiatives, saying that it devalues overall design and the work of designers.

Twitter posts, such as this one from Paul Soulellis, creative director of New York’s Soulellis Studio, have asked designers not to participate in Gap’s call for submissions: “My plea to designers: do not post new logos for @Gap’s benefit. Protect your profession & insist that work be strategic & compensated.”