Many designers who worked hard on this project may feel that the competition requirements requested a particular framework for the formulation for the logo. There seemed to be limits set: the brief implies a request for unique design used for a specific film festival. The brief went so far as to say:
'For a film to be considered for inclusion in the festival, it must reflect one or more of the eight UN Millennium Development Goals. Entrants to the logo competition should familiarize him/herself with the MDGs whose target date is 2015.'
It was assumed that the MDGs and the festival are intimately linked. The logo chosen does not seem to address this link.
For example, I just ran across this image, just moments ago, doing some shopping. Never would have thought twice about it before. Such an icon has its place. The image is generic and lacks specificity, but it is a quickly recognizable icon, like the play button on a DVD player.
Some frustration lies in the fact that the chosen design could be applied to nearly any film festival...or nearly any place where there is a call for discussion. As a logo and icon, the quotes without the image of an African village, or a hungry child, or a twilight-wrapped savanna is voiceless.
In a media campaign, I can see and appreciate the potential of the logo framing images. But this was not a competition about a media campaign.
Choosing a logo for the festival from the pool entries coupled with using the quotes for a publicity campaign might be a good compromise here.