I’m pretty sure most of my visitors are aware of accessibility and design with user needs in mind. Those would be ethical issues surrounding user necessities. So what about client end ethical issues? What happens when a company that is morally unsound asks for work?
Coca Cola are notorious for murdering union leaders in Latin America, so by designing them an identity which essentially lies to the consumer are we endorsing the immoral acts of the company? Would designing for the oil industry be a strike against consideration for climate change?
Designers seem to be increasingly worried about these issues surrounding the evils of capitalism, as made apparent in the First Things First Manifesto. To me it’s just a pretentious crock. It’s very easy to take a moral stand point and refuse to work for a company - but what of it?
Any work that is offered by a money hungry company that is declined by a morally upright individual is going to be taken up by another designer who doesn’t care. In the end by not doing work, nothing is done to stop the dumping of toxic waste in third world countries.
If any individual actually cared about ethical issues then why would they sit around simply refusing work? Why not get off their fat arse and do something about it against all adversities instead of just pretending to care by protesting mildly from a comfortable La-Z-Boy?
The only thing that inspires change is being proactive, such as going out and helping people whose lives have been affected negatively by global corporations. Designing a few images about how mean capitalism is will just get lost in a sea of visual stimuli and hyper aesthetics.
I’m not going make myself appear better than others for pretending to give a hoot. The practices of any corporation I should decide to work for does not fall within my moral responsibility just because I’m a designer. I doubt the cleaning crew for Coke think long and hard about their ethical duty.
Just because I don’t care doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate change. Good for all those organisations which actively participate in ways to change things for the better. I hope their work will continue to inspire others to be proactive about helping others.
In conclusion, I’m not going to parade how concious I am of moral issues by meekly refusing design work. If I were to ever take an ethical stand point you bet I wouldn’t involve design in the concoction - it’d be a real effort to do something that can make a difference.
Comments are offWho are we in a digital sense? Online we perceive others differently, as interpreted by a series of images and text that wouldn’t be logically presented in a real life format. Often we construct our bodies online creating an identity that we control and manipulate - some identities are truer than others.
How does our existence vary from who we are on and off screen? One could argue you are what you become, and if feigning a characteristic online were done consistently then eventually it would become a part of that individual. Therefore an online persona is an extension of a dormant personality. On the other hand, it is easier to fake who we are not.
To what extent do we become part of the screen and fuse with our formulated online identities? We are a generation defined by our blogs, our phones, our laptops, our televisions, our IPod’s and our digital interests. There is almost an obsessive quality in having all aspects of ourselves as close to the online world as possible. We carry a piece of our digital fingerprint where ever we go.
Could a screen be compared to an eye that looks on into another world? Is this eye omnipotent or is it limited? We make ourselves and destroy ourselves on a whim with little or no repercussions online. Yet there are still standards, netiquette and ways to behave within different circles. We are still controlled by our environment - a huge irony that contradicts the freedom of the internet.
Comments are off