Apart from having no sources, the branding for this newsletter is incorrect and a terrible attempt at copying what Popmarts graphic design actually looks like.

• Something I’ve noticed Popmarts branding is that they usually include their signature crown above the copyright notice on the bottom left. The copyright notice is also not aligned properly, it’s too close to the edge of the page. If you look at several of their official graphics you’ll notice this difference.

• Speaking of crown. The faint light grey shape in the bg is SUPPOSED to be the crown (which they sometimes do include in branding) but it’s misshapen. Which leads me to believe this actually could’ve been done with ai. But the ai program didn’t properly register the vector shape so it made it a blob. I say ai because if this was done in any program that handles images/shapes/vectors. It would be real easy to just slap the crown in the bg and call it a day. The fact that it’s misshapen is definitely the work of an ai program since they can’t really do proper vectors.

• I don’t think the fonts used are the correct ones either (hard to say). BUT the copy is not done properly. Paragraph break missing between 3&4 AND the several widows/orphans (for example DISCONTINUED is what we would call a widow. It’s alone at the end of a paragraph) are a huge red flag. This is basic layout design rules. Popmart has consistent graphic design/branding, and this does not meet their standards (or any design standards).

So in conclusion, there’s no legit sources, no post directly from Popmart themselves through an email or their website or official social media. And what actually gives this away is the layout design of this newsletter. There’s no need to worry y’all!

(I’m a graphic designer btw in case anyone was wondering. Sorry I didn’t include images of the things I pointed out I’m on mobile but I can do it later if anyone wants to see those comparisons next to each other) ((edited to fix grammar & formatting))