Final Essay

Callum O’Reilly CO261713 CoP OUGD501

Design Ethics: should personal or professional ethics take precedence in the world of graphic design?

Ethics is Moral principles that govern a person's behaviour or the conducting of an activity. This essay will discuss whether a designer should leave their own ethical beliefs at the front door of the studio, and whether or not, due to multiple variables, a designer is able to do so; until they have made a particular established position for themselves within the industry. Modern designers are taught to review ethical values from the perspective of the client, rather than their own beliefs; yet surely the basis of being a designer is communicating, and therefore having a perspective on their works. Moreover, the arguments made in this essay will attempt to understand these complicated themes.

Steff Geisbuhler states (2010, p.32) “a major ethical dilemma is to be hired to work for a client whose products, services or actions are harmful, criminal, politically unacceptable, or are promoting violence and war, or foster morally unacceptable opinions or actions”. This is a dilemma that designers face on a daily basis, should a job be separated from personal opinion, and treated as such; or should personal beliefs and morality take influence. Graphic designers have an influence on the audience through the work which they produce, if one was to design for a political party which opposes their personal stance; it could be seen as betraying the fundamentals of being a designer itself, through endorsing and promoting beliefs they separate themselves from within their personal life. As Geisbuhler discussed, the promotion of morally unacceptable opinions or actions, contribute towards this ethical dilemma; although the difference between right and wrong ethics is a concept that cannot be simply defined. General notions such as war and violence can be commonly deemed unacceptable because of their nature, yet other opinions such as tax cuts for the rich would be deemed as unacceptable to a left-wing designer - but may be acceptable to a right-wing supporter. As identified by A.C. Grayling (2007) ‘If it really is a moral make or break issue, you don’t do things you don’t agree with’. Thus, if a right-wing designer, who agreed with this notion, was proposed to create works for the Conservative Party they would not have any creative dilemma, as one does not need to consider creating content that conveys and promotes one’s own beliefs.

This link between being a graphic designer and politics is more evident than ever; modern day society is living in a time where visual influence is informing the public on political sway and decisions. This was never more evident than during the 2017 UK General Election, with the snap decision fuelled a plethora of visual responses. One of the most popular being an anti-right-wing campaign by Supermondane, works featuring slogans such as ‘Open your eyes to Tory lies’ and ‘Vote Conservative to end the NHS’ which were made with the intention of being free to download, encouraging the public to print them out and put them in plain sight. This is reiterated by keeping them all monotone, making them accessible to the widest audience possible at the most minimal of costs. This campaign is not aimed at the older richer conservative voters, but younger people, to engage them with the visual culture of the political on goings of their time. ‘If anyone doesn’t like them or think they are ineffective then that’s fine; to that I would say make your own and get your own message out there.’ Supermundane (2017) therefore exemplifying the way in which a designer uses their creative influence and license to be able to further encourage the decisions of the public. Thus, to successfully communicate to the audience in the correct way a designer must be creating for something which is influenced by their beliefs. This is further supported by Delyth Morgan (2006, p.62) ‘If you see your purpose as communicating a message, then you've got to have something to say. This inevitably means you have a perspective, which does make it a political activity.’ In order to have a purpose to communicate, which is the sole intention of being a designer, they must have a message they believe in to convey; consequently, personal ethics must take precedence within a designer’s practice.

            It could be argued as a designer, personal beliefs must be something which fuels design decisions throughout a project in order to make a finalised outcome that is informed and atheistically contributes to the world of design, without becoming a piece that is consumed in an over-saturated industry. Although the dilemma is extended because of limitations as a designer. In order to make your personal beliefs heard and coherent in the world of design you need to be in a position in which you have a name in industry that is taken seriously; yet to get to that point of your career you normally must first work under others. Due to hierarchy within agencies in the industry the designers do not always have the choice to pick their own projects that they believe in. As stated in an interview with Tony Brook (2009, p.72) ‘I firmly believe that every studio needs a philosophy… if we want to be taken seriously, we have to believe in something, and that something has to be genuine; it has to be something by which we can be measured, first by ourselves and then by others.’ Brook here is exemplifying the need to work with likeminded people. Yet when one is designing within a community of like-mindedness, it could be argued by some that the creativity within the environment is hindered. Overall the dilemma of being hired for work, or working to portray one’s own personal ethics have a relation to the designer’s position within the industry and in order to do one, they must comply to vice versa. Nonetheless if done within an environment of similar ethically minded designers this does not need to compromise on one’s own personal beliefs, rather enhance them.

            Money is a major issue when it comes to ethical design, due to its relevance to all parts of ethics - such as sustainability and means of living. Johnathan Baldwin (2006) argues ‘it’s not too difficult to refuse work if you are financially secure, but being principled can be an unaffordable luxury.’ He is arguing that in order to survive within today’s modern inflating market people are forced to do jobs in which they morally do not agree with. Yet, the argument could be raised if being a designer is the correct career path for a person who can see a practice of pseudo-stability and a regular salary as an incentive for disregarding their morality. Barnbrook (2009, pg 128) argues ‘I am sure I could be a rich person if I didn’t do socially engaged projects, but if I have enough to survive on them I would rather be doing the work that I care about than having a comfortable life saving absolutely zero, and it is central to the idea of your ‘soul’ as a designer. There is a bit of me that would die if I were coerced to tell lies.’ He is demonstrating the way in which an established and financially stable designer may take it upon themselves to be able to use their own values to create. The word “coerced” itself used within this context, expresses the intensity of emotion that a designer can feel when being forced into contradictory work. Yet Barnbrook states that if he were to take on this type of work he could be a “rich man” thus indicating that he is not as financially stable as appears and therefore must also; even with his strong personal opinions, have had to engage with work he disagrees with to have got to his current position. Consequently, in order to begin to create an established position within the design community and create a financially stable environment, which would allow for personal morality to take control in their design practice, a designer must first allow professionalism to take preference in their practice.

            ‘What is required in our field, more than anything else, is continuous transgression. Professionalism does not allow for that because transgression has to encompass the possibility of failure’ Milton Glaser (2001) discusses his position on whether professionalism is vital within a designer works. Transgression is a point of this discussion that highlights the basis of the industry of design itself, without transgression the sector would cease to exist as a whole. The definition of design ‘The art or action of conceiving of and producing a plan or drawing of something before it is made’ (2017) conveys a transgressive nature as such basis, through the words ‘before it is made’. Something cannot be designed after it has already been made, thus in order for design to exist it must move away from professionalism and a designer essentially has to consider personal ethics to produce anything that could be deemed a ‘design’. The very essence of professionalism expresses a success of a product produced therefore there is no room for it within a designer work ethic, as in order to design there must be risks - produced by its need for transgression. This quote epitomises the lack of space for professionalism when it comes to the world of creative design, although this does not mean that a designer can only work with sets of clients that withhold the same ethical values. Creative licence as a designer allows the creative the ability to be able to convince and persuade, not only to the audiences in which the work is being produced for - but also the clients. If you enter into discussions with a client, such as large corporations that do not particularly hold good ethics, by bringing your own ethical values into the equation they would improve the public’s view of that corporation; as well as enhancing the work produced by thoroughly being able to engage with its content and process. A technique adopted by Sophie Thomas (part of the Thomas. Matthews design group) declares in her practice ‘if you set yourself up as having scruples you usually attract clients who appreciate that. Sometimes the most interesting jobs are those clients who aren’t ethically minded but can be persuaded or pushed!’ (2004, p.19). By adopting this process and experimenting with it, designers can include a level of professionalism by completing a project successfully to the client’s needs; yet the designers personal influence remains to be the ethical values that a designer essentially follows in the process of design, in order to create a ‘design’ in the first place.

            A challenge that designers face, is correctly informing themselves on the product or service they will be promoting through their works, as creating content for a client the design is essentially endorsing that content. Failing to do this crucial step within the design process, could possibly lead to spinning content off as being un-true to its purpose/output, such as allowing a company to appear environmentally friendly that are not. ‘My biggest ethical issue concerns whether I am brave enough or care enough to follow that trail of manufacturing to learn that the product or service I am about to promote is the very thing that undermines me and what I care about’ – Robyn Waxman explains (2010), being brave enough to explore these options could damage a designer’s name within industry. If a designer’s work comes about from word of mouth, and calibre of work; yet you turn work down as the content the client wishes to present is not correctly informed, it may appear that you are a designer that wishes not to work with their clients to their needs. Yet care is needed, as mentioned, without caring enough to investigate this staple in the design process. A designer can appear to undermine what they personally care about; thus, creating design with no emotive value to that designer and not reaching the full creative potential that the work could be output into the public. Therefore, in order to produce work that avoids greenwashing a client’s content and deceiving their audience the designer must take the time to properly inform themselves; thus, indicating that their personal ethical values should take priority over professionalism before accepting a commission. Yet the process of this research involves a level of professionalism, in order to ensure it is done before each project; the final decision is based on the personal ethical beliefs of that designer.

In conclusion, it is evident that a personal approach towards design should take priority within a designers practice, as stated by reputable designer Neville Brody (2017) the best modern-day designers are ‘conscious of issues reflecting the rest of the world, and aware of their role within that. They initiate information, inspire and create awareness. Their work is lively, fantastic and bold.’ Without a personal approach with a designer’s own ethical values, they are disconnecting themselves from “issues reflecting the world” and thus surely depleting the purpose of being a communicator, as previously supported by Delyth Morgan. A dilemma still remains over this subject due to the unclarified line between what is regarded as ethically correct and incorrect, an issue that would be eliminated through the sole dedication of professionalism within the industry. Though this would end the dilemma, it would also terminate the sole purpose of design, to create something new, as an endeavour that relies on transgression.

Designer’s ethics are often shaped by opinions that have been nurtured and socialised over time. For example, wealthier designers with financial stability rarely have ethics formed via necessity, because they have the ability to be financially supported in most circumstances. This issue can therefore be argued on a class line, as personal beliefs shaping design choice is shaped by a designer’s background and socialised viewpoints. Without personal opinion being upheld in ethical design, the creative industry would cease to progress. Yet, in arguing this point in order to have a voice which is to be heard amongst the saturated visual world, you must have an established position in industry, and therefore complete tasks that do not comply with a designer’s own ethics. This process does not always mean that a creative needs to defy their beliefs if they are to find a studio which upholds similar values, as Brook earlier identified. Nor does the clients’ lack of ethics need to affect the designers, which fuels successful work, as clients are open to being challenged to incorporate modern ethical practice; enhancing public view on their business as well as enabling the maximum ability of the designers practice to create an outcome that they believe in also. This is something that is a proven philosophy embraced by successful design agency, Thomas.Matthews. Overall, personal approaches allow for the most prosperous of design; and enable a designer to develop with a productive transgressive nature. This nurtures the design practice and excels their creative output onto the public, yet through doing so, a particular amount of professionalism is required to allow for an innovative relationship with a client; ensuring a result both designer and client can be satisfied with. 

Bibliography

Eye Magazine. A.C. Grayling (2007). Being Good [online] Available at: http://www.eyemagazine.com/opinion/article/being-good1 [Accessed 6 April. 2018].

Cranmer, J. and Zappaterra, Y. (2004). Conscientious objectives. Mies: Rotovision.

It’s Nice That. (2017). Supermundane: political posters have the power to reach beyond our bubble. [online] Available at: https://www.itsnicethat.com/news/supermundane-anti-tory-posters-for-the-uk-general-election-150517 [Accessed 11 Dec. 2017].

It's Nice That. (2017). The only way is ethics: what are the moral obligations of a graphic designer?. [online] Available at: https://www.itsnicethat.com/features/ethics-graphic-design-essay-131016 [Accessed 12 Dec. 2017].

Kane, E. and Kane, E. (2010). Ethics. Campbell Hall, New York: Eileen MacAvery Kane, pp.32,39.

Oxford Dictionaries | English. (2017). design | Definition of design in English by Oxford Dictionaries. [online] Available at: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/design [Accessed 12 Dec. 2017].

Roberts, L. (2006). Good : an introduction to ethics in graphic design. Lausanne: [Distributed in the] USA and Canada [by] Watson Guptill, pp.62, 92,.

Shaughnessy, A. (2010). How to be a graphic designer, without losing your soul. London: Laurence King, p.72.