categories
archives
rss

Work Ethics

When we leaf through graphic design directories, we seldom wonder whether the work we see was paid or credited, or whether the designer was ethically, politically or religiously coerced in any way. Designers somehow manage to keep themselves above the harsher realities of their own society in a plane of abstract, neutral mediation – the very presence of graphic design in any given society may be presented as an index of freedom of expression – yet few people look into the subtle modes of restraint and control that permeate the magazine-lined white cubes of the design studios.

Designers tend to see their job as essentially value-free, ethically neutral. All they have to do to keep it that way is follow the rules, do the best job possible, regardless of beliefs and values, their own and their clients’, and the possible outcomes of their work. When designers want ethics, they generally turn to “outside” sources. In other words: design is ethical when it works for ethical clients (NGOs), uses ethical materials (recycled paper) or encompasses ethical subjects (peace demonstrations), while remaining neutral on all other occasions. The causes named above are undoubtedly worthy – that is not the issue – but we must wonder whether we are in fact objectifying ethics, limiting them to certain accepted practices, while forgetting that design itself is an industrial activity with specific internal ethics and politics that remain largely unobserved.

Websites, corporate identities or magazines are, more often than not, designed by surprisingly large groups of people structured in strict hierarchies. The fact that the task itself is creative only makes these hierarchies more tense and difficult to manage. As the work of Italian philosopher Antonio Negri demonstrates, there is an ongoing evolution from industries based on the mass production of commodities (material labour) to modes of production based on intellectual, creative work (immaterial labour). Naturally, this change requires the development of new ways to control a workforce that is radically different from the traditional factory worker. Some of these techniques of control are examined in the works of Edward Said (particularly the Reith Lectures) and Noam Chomsky (Necessary Illusions).

Obviously, these techniques of control have to be embedded in the discourse and methods of every practitioner at every stage of their career. During their formative years, designers undergo a “behavioural conditioning” of sorts that effectively blinds them to the industrial nature of their own profession. While at school, designers are trained to be creative loners who sporadically condescend to be part of a group, whereas in the “real world” they are frequently small cogs in complex corporate machines consisting almost entirely of designers employed in different capacities. Designers are trained to deal with clients who know nothing about design and who only want their problems solved but, in the “real world”, designers deal primarily with other designers; their employers are often designers, their co-workers are often designers. In other words: the client is often a designer. The myth of the designer as a creative loner is an effective way of diverting attention away from the middleman and in fact from the entire labour structure of the design profession that, far from being an abstraction, reproduces local – and global – social dynamics and restraints.

A valuable way of connecting design to local realities and problems would be to see it as a concrete job, produced by people who are part of their own society, and vulnerable to its pressures and shortcomings. A better knowledge of how design’s inner workings and tensions diverge locally would undoubtedly contribute to deepen the range of its overall ethical concerns. While it is comfortable to keep ethical, political and social concerns restricted to conveniently external goals, we tend to forget that design has internal ethics and politics. I’m not saying that we should forget the larger picture. My point is that the politics and ethics of the design workspace are part of that larger picture.

Mario Moura 2005

 

11 comments

At last! An important word to say on this subject, which has been skirted around for so long but not articulated properly…

/Anonymous 17/11/2005

 

This is an excellent observation – design is so often beating its chest (or manifesto) about either its politics or its nemesis: the plastic arts. Two major ‘internal’ issues that are seldom addressed are gender and race -this might be a little tangential to Mario’s original and ‘original’ point but for design to embed itself; ideologically, aesthetically, upon everyday consciousness’ in the world of the everyday, then surly, this internal examination is needed. Gender, outside its ironic manifestations, is rarely addressed – how can design be taking seriously as a voice, or visual platform, against say, female body/objectification, if the internal politics of most studio’s, client relationships etc are ingrained, both linguistically and structurally , on gender lines – how many ‘pitch presentations’ are performed by the ‘female’ of the agency, how much work is printed by female printers? It is banal I know, but it is the only way design can move away from a ‘poster’ mentality – posters decorate the world not change it.

/Joe D 18/11/2005

 

“The myth of the designer as a creative loner is an effective way of diverting attention away from the middleman and in fact from the entire labour structure of the design profession that, far from being an abstraction, reproduces local – and global – social dynamics and restraints…A valuable way of connecting design to local realities and problems would be to see it as a concrete job, produced by people who are part of their own society, and vulnerable to its pressures and shortcomings.”

I’m a mature student who also works in industry. Sometimes I think that one can design or write critically about certain issues that one then reproduces or accepts in the work environment. It’s part of that ‘just wanting a quiet life’ mentality but also it’s because of having no way of addressing the issue in a way that is concrete and will affect real change. You’d hardly thnk of designing a poster to inform/activate the others in the office for instance… instead, these internal issues are voiced in other ways, but still end up in no more than muted agreement that there’s a bit of a problem.

Flipping this round - if we accept that a bit of ‘consciousness raising’ - by word of mouth or by poster is not enough to change the (micro-) world of the office, then it certainly isn’t going to be a ‘tactic’ that will work to ‘change the world at large.’ It becomes obvious then, that to understand how to interject effectively in ethical concerns ‘out there’ one has to start ‘in here’. Or, as Mr Moura puts it more eloquently…

“A better knowledge of how design’s inner workings and tensions diverge locally would undoubtedly contribute to deepen the range of its overall ethical concerns.”

/Dene Rayner 21/11/2005

 

The original post and the following comments all show the gaping hole in the idea of the profession of communication design – the whole movement to professionalism in graphic communication has focused on the individual – nearly always in relation to the artist not the solicitor or accountant, doctor etc. The movement is also weakened by a focus on professionalism = economic security.

The local doctor, solicitor etc can have a direct influence on the local conditions to where their practice is situated because, as part of the bigger infrastructure of society, they occupy a position in the micro/macro structures of society. This is where graphic communication has little active role – good/bad design, ethical/non-ethical design is of less importance then local/global engagement.

Becoming a Professional, now, cannot come about from historical links with power structures that have benefited law, medicine, economics etc. But, Professional respect will come from a presence and active participation in local communities – less about the evils of coca-cola but more about the lack of local crèche facilities, racism, transport, dentists etc…

/Gary Johansen 04/12/2005

 

I am currently a graphic design student but also do freelance work. I mention this with regard to the idea of the loner. At university I do primarily deal with other designers, however, the clients of my freelance work have been everything but designers, from youth workers to environmentalists, from doctors to political campaigners. When working with these people I do feel very much like a ‘loner’, as I have a responsibility to explain the concept of design to them and pray that the work I produce speaks volumes for itself. Especially when, on many occasions, I have dealt with clients that have never employed a professional designer and they are shocked by the prices charged. This is where anxiety kicks in because I begin to feel reluctant about charging them the full price of what my work is worth. This is a confidence problems that needs to be tackled by ‘loners’ everywhere, because they do not have the power of an organisation to support them.

Moura raises some interesting points about ethics, some of which I agree with but some of which I feel are not necessarily true. An ethical consideration in design does not only have to be about the content of the work but also how designers deal with their clients. Most of my clients so far have been charity organisations and although I put the same amount of effort into my work as I would for a profit making organisation, I feel it unethical for me to charge them the same amount of money especially because I have been battling in my mind how to portray the moral and ethical ideas of the organisation in order to capture the target audience in a way that they will really want to donate time or resources to this charity. For me to then not offer my resources at a reduced rate would be unjust and hypocritical. I do not believe that “design is only ethical when it works for ethical clients”. If the designer does have any particular ethical, political or religious considerations then they have three choices: 1 – to make their standpoint clearly evident in the work, 2 – to refrain from making their standpoint known at all and 3 – to simply design something that does not breech their standpoint in any way but that also does not hide it or make it evident. I do not believe that designers always remain neutral. Another aspect to consider is how strongly a person believes in these ethics, I, personally, would not design anything that goes against my morals and ethics of life in the name of remaining neutral in order to follow the rules because I do not believe that design is value-free. I prefer to think of it as a tool to change people’s views and opinions about certain aspects of life otherwise misunderstood and I agree with Joe D’s comment that design will only move forward by moving away from ‘poster’ mentality through the aim of changing the world, not merely decorating it.

I feel it would be unethical in itself for me to disregard my own morals when designing because I feel that my beliefs are true and I want to share them with the world. Why should design, as one of the most dynamic disciplines, not be allowed to take advantage of the freedom of speech this society is so famous for?

/arberor hadri 06/12/2005

 

“Why should design, as one of the most dynamic disciplines, not be allowed to take advantage of the freedom of speech this society is so famous for?”

Isn’t Moura’s point partly that although we designers may champion and design posters about freedom of speech, that doesn’t mean it’s actually exercised in the work place from which that very poster comes - there are all sorts of ethical issues swept under the carpet.

i used to work for a company designing a huge retail banking concept for a leading bank in Saudi Arabia. We had a lot of discussions about how it felt unethical to design signage directing the women to a small room at the back to get their cash out, out of sight of the huge golden domed central atrium that the men banked in. We never discussed that where ever our desks were placed in the open-plan office a visiting male client would inevitably weave himself amongst the desks of male designers to one where a female sat to ask them to fax that little document for them or to order a cab.

Perversely perhaps, if you value big outcomes over petty compromises, while we designed that signage in the end - was it worth losing a job over, reasoned the boss? - we’d have let off steam by sending the client off to the wrong address… (in our dreams… is it worth losing a job over, we can hear the boss reasoning in our heads)

/Anon 07/12/2005

 

I think that it all depends on the individual, as with most things, but is not just about the individual. Alot of people will go to extremes to design the ‘best’ advert or do the ‘best’ magazine layout as long as they get paid well for it. Morals and ethics seem to go over many peoples heads these days and everything revolves around the pay check they’ll recieve at the end of the month. I find this ridiculous as i believe that what we do - COMMUNICATE through design, should be used as an advantage to people not as a profit enducer for a larger company that’ll pocket the difference anyway. It’s like being sucked into a corporate machine and you have no control over what you do or say, you’re just some ‘monkey’ clapping your symbols together. I think that people need to have more backbone and stand up for what they think. So many are just dragged into the ‘norm’ because it’s ‘the right thing’ to do. I don’t agree that design is all about the individual, sure within creating your design, but the people who you are commnicating to are your responsibility aswell; to make sure that the right message is sent across and that you as a person can go home and sleep at night knowing that you’ve made people listen. Design is not and I think is wrong to use it to ‘hypnotise’ people into believing one thing when there is a different underlying meaning.
In the end people who work as designers and pretty much have peoples minds in their hands should use this opportunity in a positive light and think how they would feel had it been their child, sibling or partner look at that particular advert/magazine spread…would you feel differently then? Sometimes things need to happen for people to switch on!

/Rachel M 14/12/2005

 

I agree, as designers we have a responsibility to the people that we are communicating too as well as to ourselves. We need to at some point accept that in alot of cases, whatever it may be that we are communicating will have an effect on someone’s life to some degree. But at the same time, we need to accept and understand that it is impossible to please everyone and the chance are we will always upset someone. But not only us, let us not forget that we as designers are set briefs to design such things, isn’t it about time that clients/companies took a stand point on this as well, the responsibility can’t all be laid on the designers…

/Shireen T 15/12/2005

 

The generalisation of all designers is a major act, one that needs careful consideration. No humans are identical, and being that graphic designers are humans, it’s fair to say no two designers are the same. I agree in some respects to elements of Moura’s comments, especially with regards to designers feeling and believing that their job is ‘essentially value free, ethically neutral’. But such thinking cannot be applied to all designers.

I’m an aspiring graphic design student. I come from a traditional art & design background. However over time, I began developing a love for words, their meanings, power, which blossomed to my love of poetry. I wanted a means to express myself and communicate to a wider audience, which led me to studying graphic design.

I’ve always been conscious about the need to act in a just way. Never one to follow the crowd. I’ve carried that type of mentality through to my design work, and much like Arberor, I refuse to produce work contradictory to my beliefs.

If there are problems in workplaces of unethical design production, then the individual who is whole-heartedly dedicated to creating ethical design should do everything in their power to convey honest and sincere messages. If a link in a chain is not connected in the same way as the other links, it will be noticed, and it is likely it will change the entire flow of the chain. Is breaking the chain a bad idea? Or does such an act free one from an occupation of distasteful behaviour, removing the shackles of fearful silence orchestrated by unethical individuals?

It appears a designers’ desire for success dissolves the weight of responsibility that oozes from every part of their creative human figures. Refusing to take on that campaign for alcoholic beverages, in the minds of many designers, would be the end of their careers, their make or break moment, the deterioration of their design worlds. I guess to make an excuse for them, one might say that the messages given out by ‘successful people’, relating to ‘living the high life’, all revolve around making money. People always need designers, so why not take on that shady and commercial job that supposedly holds the tools to making ones’ dream a reality? Why hold back from receiving large sums of money?
Why not sell your soul to achieve liquid goals?
Why not burn your soles running into an endless hole?
Why not just forget you have powers of persuasion?
Why not just tell lies through graphic communication?
Why not drive a car that’s fuelled with corruption?
Why not design things that aid human disruption?
Why not be a machine that mass produces ignorance?
And revels in the fact it ignores poor infants?
We can complain about others until we stop breathing,
Why not review ourselves and let our actions do the speaking?
Words can often penetrate,
But if designers changed their ways,
Would there be a place for designers that are fake?

Unethical designs only exist because people want them to. If every designer refused to create unethical designs, imagine the shift society would have if their conviction to do what is right was backed up with layers of positive action, and refusal to conform to corrupt ideologies. The outcomes would be beautiful.

I once spoke to a work colleague, and they stated that anyone could be a graphic designer without much difficulty. I strongly and openly disagreed as I pointed out there are many visual tools in design that give out certain messages, and that because designers have so much power, they need to be aware of the responsibilities in society. Designers, whether they admit it or not, can affect the way people think. If designers are giving off unjust and unethical messages, then how can we expect society to progress in ways which are ethical? Obviously, others factors play a major role in what happens within individual/national/global societies, but designers can’t distance themselves from the fact they play a role too.

Perhaps what all designers and aspiring designers should do is question why they became/want to become designers. We should question ourselves on every choice we make in life, especially when the outcomes of our actions will affect others. It is from the answers that we can collectively establish our ethics in design.

We blind ourselves to thinking we’re no more than machines,
Incapable of holding righteous beliefs,
But if clients can express their unethical needs,
Can’t designers use their power to make ethical design increase?

/Dhruv Kalan 15/12/2005

 

Having lived in India all my life and been exposed to a completely different culture, i find it interesting to compare design in both English and Indian cultures.
India is still a country where visual communication lacks recognition.
Graphic design as a whole is a relatively new addition to my own life, and has come be my goal for the future. Having interned at a small design firm in New Delhi (India) i was exposed to a whole different world of design. From my own personal view, i saw alot of design for both the client and the designer revolve around the idea of just ‘what looks good rather than what the audience will or will not relate to.’ Something beautiful and elegant looking is still the high end of the demand scale with majority of India’s morals and ethics. No doubt for many of the designers working at my level of the company, the pay check was an important part, but for alot of them, especially women, it was a big achievement to be working at a computer, more than anything at all. Perhaps it was just the atmosphere of the company i interned with, i dont know but the overall feel was more to do with pleasing the eye of the head designer, with use of colour and textures rather than the client who has no relevance to the design world what so ever.
Graphic design has such a long way to go in India, although in itself the country has by and large become much more image conscious, it will still take the country great effort to get itself out of the whole idea of ‘prettiness’ and move in to the limelight of competition and high end name building.
The whole idea of the graphic desginer being a ‘loner’ in the world of design, could perhaps be read into differently in India. The actual work, including, talking to to client, designing and printing is all done by the employers. All design concepts, come from people with very little designing experience and qualification, the ultimate yes/no then has the input of the head.These lower end designers are not those amongst the people of the world who want to make a difference, but are those who merely work there.In conclusion I do think it is important that perhaps within these growing communities of consciousness in India, a consensus is met, where the head interacts more with not only the client, but manages to encourage both lower end designers and clients to understand the need of conveying something more from their design piece rather than the desired need of a creating something which is just merely ‘pretty.’ The design companys workforce needs to be driven forward with the excitement of creating something dynamically visual, which in turn is going to make them more worthy of their job and also perhaps convey messages of substance to the world around them.

/zoe collington 16/12/2005

 

In 2009 we released the book ‘Limited Language: Rewriting Design: Responding to a feedback culture’ which re-engaged with this original post.

For more on the book as a whole: http://bit.ly/bookcomments

Colin + Monika

/colin 15/11/2009

 

write a comment

we encourage people to recycle your comments in their own research as we may collage them into our own writing with the aim to publish the resulting articles (any post eventually used will be credited). We encourage comments to be 200 words or more.

line and paragraph breaks automatic. e-mail address will never be displayed. html allowed: <a href=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>