Do designers have the responsibility to
make the world a better place ?
It is apparent that the First and the
Second World War of the twentieth centaury, where the two main factors that led
designers to question their own roles within society, ‘the political strains
and appalling misjudgments that led up to the First World War and it’s
aftermath revealed the turmoil of forces underlying modern life: industrial,
economic, political and social.’ Roberts, R. (2006) Section 1: Making good / a brief history, Good: An introduction to
ethics in graphic design, AVA Publishing, pp 16-31. The shock and the aftermath
of the First World War motivated not only designers, but also the public to
think about these new forces that had arisen from these atrocities. However it
is the events of the Second World War that really brought social, political and
economic issues to the full attention of graphic designers and artists alike. ‘Within
the return of peace, there was a general determination that the pre-war
economic conditions suffered by millions, together with the war itself, would
never occur again. The practice of graphic design was conditioned by these
feelings. Many designers became openly political and questioned the intentions
of their clients, public or private.’ (Roberts, R. 2006). Consequently this
could be deemed as the turning point for when practitioners developed this
conscious way of designing. Not only did the wars implement these feelings, but
also the economic boom that followed produced a mixture of thoughts towards
designing for good purposes, as the boom generated a mass consumerist culture,
which promoted big business. As a result of this new culture and practice, Ken
Garland in 1964 devised the First Things First manifesto, in which he states
his opposition to this capitalist society and pushes for designers to create
for purposeful reasons over trivial products. And this really is the start of
the debate as to whether designers should be socially responsible, or if these intentions
are unachievable and void.
‘But we are proposing a reversal of priorities in favor of more
lasting forms of communication.’ (Garland in Beirut, 2002, p.5) in the
manifesto Garland was stating that he and others alike wanted to change the
current attitudes towards design, and societies view upon design, that
designers only created for consumer products only with little or no
consideration for anything other than money.
He himself rallied against consumer culture and believed in design for a
good purpose; ‘we think that there are other things more worth our using our
skills and experience on. There are street for streets and buildings … all the
other media through which we promote our trade, our education, our culture and
our greater awareness of the world.’ (Garland in Beirut, 2002, p.5) here he
proposed that these items where more worthy of designers attention and that
these types of items should be concentrated on more so than the ‘trivial
purposes’ he mentions earlier on in the manifesto. In support of this statement
is the work of Burkey Belser, whom in 1990 designed the nutrition facts label
for the US food and drug administration (FDA). The design now currently
displays on over 6.5 billion food packages, and has been called by some to be the
most frequently used form of graphic design in the world. This nutrition label
has had a huge impact upon society as it allows everyone to see what exactly is
in their food, which in turn has had positive implications on people’s health
as they can chose fairly whether they want to consume the product as they now
know what good and bad elements are in them. As well as this the company making
the product now have to tell the truth about what is in their food and this has
meant that a lot of companies have had to revise their original ingredients, as
people now knew the truth of the nutrition inside and many where deemed
unhealthy. This piece of design is highly valuable to society and it is a
positive and purposeful creation, which matches the description Garland made in
his manifesto. Further more the desire for lasting communication Garland
proposed, has also been met by this design, and has exceeded the expectation of
success and longevity he had originally wanted. The nutrition label is still
present on millions of items of food, worldwide and it could be said that this
design is one of the leading advocators of these principles. The design itself
is very simplistic, it is in a grid and laid out in a manner that is functional
and this could be a reason for its success. The design choices have made this
piece of communication usable, as it is so simple, this simplicity almost makes
the label invisible to the world and it passes by everyday without people
really every contemplating that it is a commodity of graphic design, and that
it was designed by a designer, Burkey Belser. Meaning that the label is
silently successful, not bought into, and serves a meaningful purpose.
However Michael
Beirut, disagrees with this, he believes that because this example of design
isn’t noticed and it can not be accepted as a adversary for the drive towards
responsible design, aimed at improving the world from a social aspect. “Finally
here the prescription… things like the FDA Nutrition Facts label… generally
receive neither awards nor accolades… ’
Beirut, M. (2007) Ten Footnotes to
a Manifesto, Seventy-nine Short Essays on Design, Princeton
Architectural Press, pp 57-58. In this paragraph it is clear the Beirut thinks
that because the design isn’t interesting it does not receive enough attention
and therefore it is not successful, and does not create enough of an impact to
have a greater social effect. ‘Not
only is design grounded in human dignity and human rights, it is also an
essential instrument for implementing, and embodying the principles of the
Constitution in the everyday lives of all men, women and children.” Buchanan,
R. Human Dignity and Human Rights.
Thoughts on the Principles of Human-Centered Design, Looking Closer Five
Critical writing on Graphic Design, Allworth Press, pp 140-143. Beirut
forgets that this label is used across millions of food packages, and it does
in fact provide a meaningful purpose, all though it isn’t an obvious cause it
has led the way to the truth in food. Buchanan disagrees with this and what he
means is design isn’t always about being about really serious, important cause
but the smaller things matter too, and that design can range from the most
basic level of importance to the highest, the nutrition food label is not
considered to be very interesting but it still helps humans in their everyday
lives and so it impacts on our everyday lives, which in turn is actually still
important. Burkey Belser’s design is quietly successful, simple in its concept
and appearance it remains timeless, therefore it could be argued due to the
fact the design is humble, and almost unnoticed it hasn’t needed to change to
fit in to any type of trend that precedes it, and the label is still used today
is due to these factors. As well as this Beirut is also wrong in when he stated
that it would not win any
awards as in fact President Bill Clinton issued an award of design
excellence for the nutrition facts label in 1997 to Burkey Belser in
Washington, which is ten years before Beirut wrote the ten footnotes to a
manifesto, and therefore it almost makes his point invalid.
Another example of simple but very effective design is the Red Ribbon,
which has been used since 1991 to raise awareness of AIDs and HIV. The ribbon
like the nutrition food label doesn’t contain a mass amount of design elements,
it isn’t overly complex or glamorous, but it works on a huge scale and again
like the label it is recognized worldwide. The simplicity of these designs has
made them successful, they do not date and they are easy to understand by many.
Especially for the red ribbon the concept is the cleverest part of the design
and it is actually quite complex. However the ribbon differs from the food
label, as its content and message are more serious and critical, meaning it is
actually considered and recognized as a piece of design unlike the food label
which in everyday life seems to go un noticed. Therefore according to Beirut
this would be an example of design that is successful in creating a positive
social response to a needed cause, however as the design is still so simple it
could be said that the nutrition food label is equally as successful, and this
would mean Beirut is wrong. But in saying this Buchanan has also recognized the
importance of meaning, ‘I believe we all recognized the significant
transformation of the old design theme of “form and function” into the new
theme “form and content.”’ (Buchanan, R. 2000) And this would mean that he too
would agree that the AIDs red ribbon is indeed a higher degree of importance,
than the food label as its content and purpose is as stated more urgent. Yet
Buchanan still believes in the significance of design on all levels of
seriousness, and design focused on improving human life, no matter how big or
small. Agreeably content in the case of the red ribbon is considered more than
the function, but again the function of the ribbon is also important and so it
is actually form, content and function that are all equally as crucial as each
other. ‘It reminded me that quality of design is distinguished not merely by
technical skill of execution or by aesthetic vision but by the moral and
intellectual purpose toward which technical and artistic skill is directed.’
(Buchanan, R. 2000) would comply with the previous comment. All three count and
all three have made the red ribbon what it is today. The success of the red
ribbon, as well as the nutrition food label, would be recognized as a ‘lasting
form of communication’ by Ken Garland’s manifesto and vision. As well as this
the work of the red ribbon would also fit into Rick Poynor’s revised version of
Garlands original manifesto, Poynor shared a similar if not more stronger view
on the purposes of design. ‘There are more pursuits more worthy of our
problem-solving skills. Unprecedented environmental, social and cultural crises
demand our attention.’ (Poynor in Beirut, 2002, p.6) The statement supports the
work of the red ribbon, which not only was to raise awareness of AIDs amongst
society, but also culturally, as the disease was never really talked about and
was frowned upon up until the mid eighties/ early nineties, the time the ribbon
was created. Furthermore the red ribbon was made for charity, it was not meant
for profit. This would means the red ribbon design would fit in with the
principles of both Garland’s and Poynor’s manifestos.
‘We do not advocate the abolition of high-pressure advertising: this
is not feasible.’ (Garland in Beirut, 2002, p.5) In this part of the manifesto
Garland is implying that consumer selling will never be completely gone as
people will continue to buy and companies will continue to sell, but Garland is
asking designers to think about their responsibility in the world and how they
could possibly do work for both. He himself created the manifesto but still
designed for a toy company. It could be considered that both types of purposes
for design might be the most realistic. For example the work of Janet Lai, who
created a campaign called The Notion of Luxury. This campaign featured bags
from the infamous luxury jewelry company Tiffany’s. Based in America, this
company makes billions a year and their products are considered to be luxury
items, they even make jewelry with real diamonds. The campaign explores the
differences of developed and developing countries, posing juxtaposition on the
idea of what luxury is. For example cards where inserted into the bags, on one
side it said ‘$2 can buy you a cup of latte’ and on the other the same value
could buy a family a meal in Haiti. This really questions the audience on their
own values. ‘Designers who devote their efforts primarily to advertising … a
mental environment so saturated with commercial messages that is changing the
very way citizen-consumers speak, think, feel, respond and interact.’ (Poynor
in Beirut, 2000, p.6) Poynor in his manifesto expressed how he felt the mass
consumer culture that is now present, especially in Western society, has
simplified the thoughts of the public, and that design, advertising and so
forth has just become noise and no-one really takes in any meaningful message
or ever consider anything worthwhile. However The Notion of Luxury, does
question the audiences thoughts, it addresses them directly by using a company
that by Poynor, Garland and others, perceive to be a commercial, and
consumerist. The design work of this campaign again like the red ribbon, is for
charity, and again isn’t overly complicated, this means the concept and therefore
the message really stand out, and so the content is the most important aspect
of the campaign. However the campaign is still in a way promoting and selling
Tiffany’s ‘the greatest designers have always found ways to align the aims of
their corporate clients with their own personal interests and ultimately, with
the public good.’ (Beirut, M. 2007) and this describes the idea that a designer
cannot just choose one or the other, it is not a straight choice, and that the
best designers do work for big companies but they don’t forget their own values
and try to take responsibility wherever and whenever possible. This is
important as it balances the work of consumer and socially good purposes, as
Janet Lai’s campaign does. The campaign at least considers its implications on
the world and in society; the designer is pushing for the consumer to do the
same.
But actually how good is this notion. Can it even be considered to be
good socially, when there is the involvement of a big business? ‘ Yet like many
cultural institutions, they are supported by philanthropy from many large
corporations, including the generous Phillip Morris Companies… and come to
think of it don’t I know a lot of graphic designers who smoke?’ (Beirut, M.
2007) Some designers take no responsibility for who they design for, and for
what purpose, hence the volume of mass consumerism. For example when Frank
Gianninoto designed the new packaging for Marlboro cigarettes, in 1955.
Cigarettes are mentioned, within a list of products that mostly have ethical
issues surrounding them and the companies whom sell them. ‘Encouraged in this
direction, designers then apply their skill and imagination to sell dog
biscuits…’ (Poynor in Beirut, 2000, p.6) Poynor mentions these products on
purpose as he is trying to point out that designing for the products and their
companies is irresponsible and unessential. Cigarettes in themselves are
questionable, they do not benefit anyone’s health and are the cause of many
health problems globally, they are also one of the main causes of cancer, and
they inherently are not good. And so in designing for this type of product,
trying to get people to buy the product you are therefore adding to the problem
and selling a product that you know is wrong. As Poynor stated these types of
products are somewhat unethical, and designers should really consider whether
it is right to create designs for them. Not only are cigarettes bad but also to
add to this the company who owns Marlboro, Phillip Morris, who as Beirut
agrees, are a large company who promote the activity of smoking, Marlboro as
their flagship brand of cigarettes now has four or five brands of cigarettes
with over four or five ranges each. Further more Phillip Morris himself has
admitted himself that seventy-two children on the tobacco forms where he
sources his plants for the cigarettes for, some of the children where as young
as ten years old. With all of this in mind, designing for this company and
product would be deemed as irresponsible. The packaging designed for the
Marlboro cigarettes is similar to the three examples previously discussed,
designed with only three colours plus stock, and purely type, it could be
classed as again simple and modern in its aesthetic. This like the other three
could have made it successful and its simplicity has made it applicable to
other areas of design, including the Marlboro formula one car, in 1972, again
this application has many applications and this too could be seen as irresponsible
design. However if companies like this are the ones who provide the work, it is
not the fault of the designer, and the blame of unethical practice should
really be put upon the companies themselves.
In conclusion, it seems that designers and their way and purposes for
design are becoming increasingly aware of their impact socially, politically,
culturally and even environmentally. It seems that designers like Garland and
Poynor have led the way in this almost form of design activism. ‘We propose a
reversal in priorities … and toward the exploration and production of a new
kind of meaning.’ (Poynor in Beirut, 2000, p.6) They have expressed the need
for more lasting forms of communication, which the nutrition food label and red
ribbon have certainly proved. Social responsibility can take many forms, and
there are different degrees of activism. As discussed the nutrition food label,
isn’t for a critical cause, like the red ribbon and the campaign; the notion of
luxury, nonetheless, it does enhance the living standards of people in their
everyday lives, as Buchanan describes is also an essential part of design, and
furthermore any design that is based upon helping the lives of all humans is in
some way a push for a greater world. It is clear that they all believe that
this kind of design is the designer taking responsibility for what they create.
Beirut has argued that this way of designing and these ideas are flawed, the
choice is not simply one or the other, like in the case of Philip Morris, who
supports cultural institutions which are good, but then still sells and
promotes cigarettes and smoking, and Beirut questions whether anything can be
purely good. Although it could be said that projects like the red ribbon
inherently are. In conjunction with this Beirut thinks it depends on the
circumstances and position of the designer themselves, as to whether they can
design for good. However he does not completely rule out the responsibility of
promoting positive social ideals through design, and as Roberts wrote ‘
Practically every decision we make as designers has an ethical dimension,
requiring us all to “balance the forces” in our own small way as responsible
individuals.’ (Roberts, R. 2006)
Nutrition Food Label, 1990, Burkey
Belser
The Ribbon Project, 1991
Marlboro, 1955, Frank Gianninoto
The Notion of Luxury, 2009, Janet Lai
Bibliography
Beirut, M. (2007) Ten Footnotes
to a Manifesto, Seventy-nine Short Essays on Design, Princeton
Architectural Press, pp 57-58
Beirut, M. (2002) ed. Looking
Closer 4: Critical Writings on Graphic Design, New
York, Allworth Press pp 5-6
Buchanan, R. Human Dignity and
Human Rights. Thoughts on the Principles of Human-Centered Design, Looking
Closer Five Critical writing on Graphic Design, Allworth Press, pp 140-143.
(CNN) Red ribbon: Celebrating 20 years of the iconic
AIDS symbol (http://edition.cnn.com/2011/12/01/world/aids-day-ribbon/) [Accessed
on: 7 February 2014]
Cranmer, J. and Zappaterra, Y. (2003) Conscientious Objectives: Designing for an Ethical Message,
Switzerland, RotoVision SA
(Print) Design Inspiration: Who is Burkey Belser?
(http://www.printmag.com/editors-picks/design-inspiration-who-is-burkey-belser/)
[Accessed on: 6 February 2014]
Papanek, V.
(1974) Design for the Real World: Human
Ecology and Social Change, Academy Chicago
Roberts, R. (2006) Section 1: Making good / a brief history, Good: An introduction to
ethics in graphic design, AVA Publishing, pp 16-31.
Roberts, L. (2006) Good: An introduction to ethics in graphic design, Lausanne,
Switzerland, AVA Publishing
Simmons, C. (2011) Just Design: Socially conscious design for critical causes, Ohio,
HOW Books
Shea, A. (2012) Designing for Social Change: Strategies for Community-based Graphic
Design, New York, Princeton Architectural Press
(The New York Times) Design
View; Marlboro was once No Man’s Land (http://www.nytimes.com/1995/04/16/arts/design-view-marlboro-country-was-once-no-man-s-land.html)
[Accessed on: 7 February 2014]
(World AIDs Day) The Red
Ribbon (http://www.worldaidsday.org/the-red-ribbon.php) [Accessed on: 7
February 2014]
(U.S Food and
Drug Administration) Significant Dates in U.S. Food and Drug Law History
(http://www.fda.gov) [Accessed on: 6 February 2014
Word Count:
3,142
