Accountability of the designer in terms of the message

General
Designers are image makers. And the images we fabricate have both denotative and
connotative message. How we represent reality – the connotation of “constructed”
messages – affects people. We must carefully dissect those fabrications for negative
undercurrents. Constructed messages can easily carry negative, demeaning, and foster
prejudice or violence (Landa 244:2006).

We as designers should carefully consider the message we give to the world within our
designs. We are accountable for gathering, processing and portraying information
truthfully and accurately. Incorrect information can have various negative consequences.
The wrong message can lead to misunderstandings on the receiving end or offend those
involved. Wrong interpretations can also negatively impact the person/company being
represented through the message. This can lead to serious brand failures. There are
legalities against manipulating or wrongfully conveyed information.

Providing the correct message through our designs begins at gathering the correct
information. Thus research is just as important as the actual act of designing, if not more
important. A designer needs to have gathered sufficient information to avoid any
misinterpreted or misunderstood or untruthful end results. “In order to provide
appropriate information to audiences at the local, state, and national levels, a planned
program assessment process should be implemented for obtaining the needed
information” (Richardson [sp]:1997).

The next step is carefully processing the information to avoid any unwanted, unlawful or
misunderstood messages. Knowing what information to include and what to leave out is
of great importance. Throughout the design process the designer also needs to
constantly work with the client in order to stay in line with the brand/persons’ strategy
and corporate image. Visual hierarchy and various other design elements should
consciously used to successfully carry the intended message through. The information
must be provided in ways and means desired by the respective audiences (Richardson
[sp]:1997).

As visual communicators here are some thoughts to consider when designing the
message:
- Design both transmits and affects of content.
- In a glutted global marketplace, the proliferation of brands should not compel
designers to abandon responsibility in order to get consumer’s attention at any
cost.
- A representation of reality is neither natural nor passive, but an artificial construct
that carries and communicates meaning with societal consequences.
- Negative stereotypes must be avoided at all costs and must be recognized even
when veiled (Landa 244:2006).

As information designers we also embody the responsibility to inform our client of the
various aspects of accountability to consider. There are many rules and regulations that
govern our designs in terms of the message that we, as well as our client, need to be
aware of at all times. The portrayal of others (the client) carries a responsibility as an
information designer (Landa 244:2006).

The World Wide Web

Ease of information flow is both the advantage and the disadvantage of large-scale,
decentralized systems like the World Wide Web. For all the benefits and opportunities
brought by the information revolution, with that same revolution have come the
challenges of inappropriate use. Sensitive personal data disclosed, corporate secrets
revealed, copyrighted material distributed without permission, confidential records
shared among organizations in violation of regulation and policy -- these breaches of
established social norms and laws have become part of everyday life in the Information
Age. Enormous effort in current information technology research and development is
devoted to inventing more reliable methods for restricting access to information. These
efforts notwithstanding, access restriction alone is inadequate for addressing information
misuse on the Internet. (Weitzner 2007:1).
Even when access restriction can be perfectly and completely achieved, there are
significant cases where policies implemented purely as ex ante (up front) controls are
too rigid to faithfully reflect societal needs. One example is copyright control and the
need to accommodate fair use (Weitzner 2007:1).

Our alternative is to design systems that are oriented toward information accountability
and appropriate use, rather than information security and access restriction. In a world
where information is ever more easily copied and aggregated, and where automated
correlations and inferences across multiple databases can uncover information even
when it has not been explicitly revealed, accountability must become a primary means
by which society addresses issues of appropriate use (Weitzner 2007:1).

Privacy: Information privacy rights, at their core, seek to safeguard individual autonomy
as against the power that institutions or individuals may gain over others through use of
sensitive, personal information. Policy makers worry that sensitive, and possibly
inaccurate, information will be used against people in financial, employment or
healthcare settings. Society has typically sought to safeguard information privacy rights
by limiting the collection of, or access to, personal information. Today, however, with the
proliferation of personal information on the World Wide Web and the increased analytic
power available to everyone through facilities such as Google, preventing access to or
collection of a given piece of data is often without real privacy benefit. With personal
information so widely available, privacy protection through information hiding and access
control is largely ineffective (Weitzner 2007:2).

Copyright: Copyright control for information on the Internet poses challenges similar to
those of privacy. As with privacy, the increased flow of copyrighted information brings
enormous benefits, but there are also associated risks – here the risk that copyright
holders will lose control over their works altogether and suffer massive infringement.
Experience with online copyright has shown, in a pattern also similar to the privacy
dilemma, that attempting to realize social policy goals through access control
mechanisms can become extraordinarily complex (Weitzner 2007:3).
Examples

Nandos – Joost scandal

Joost van der Westhuizen was involved in a sex scandal involving a video of him being
drunk, in his underwear, with a female and using drugs. Nandos saw the opportunity to
use this in an avertising campaign since it was a widely known story.
Nandos is famous for their controversial, tongue in cheek advetisements. They have
offended people numerous times. This ad is just another example, but the fact that it
only offends those involved in the Joost scandal. Is it therefore okay since such a small
group was personally affected by it?

Beer – Thank God

This ad is very stereotypical in terms of women, and therefore inaccurate. But it is not
aimed a female audience, but rather towards men. Secondly the catch phrase touches
on the ever so sensitive topic of religion. The fact the “God” is in a capital directly refers
to the Christian god and not just a general statement. Is it too offensive?
Tyson’s Chickens – “all natural”
Tyson claimed to produce “all natural” chickens to the wholesale public. But a Consumer
Reports test found that 56% of Tyson chicken products tested were contaminated with
campylobacter. The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine posted the
following ad to alert consumers of this health risk and in an effort to stop Tyson from
misleading the public.

Although all three examples personally offend some people, the greater audience still
found it to be a good design. The tongue in cheek, humouristic, and even stereotypical
designs always outrun the boring and mundane. When is it too offensive? Someone will
always be offended and messages will always be misunderstood or misinterpreted by
someone. So where do we draw the line?

References
Richardson, J. 1997. Collecting Accountability Information [O]. Available:
http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/AboutCES/Factsheets/accountability.html
Accessed 23 July 2009

Landa, R. 2006. Designing Brand Experience. USA: [sn]

Miller, P. Performance, accountability and information [O]. Available:

http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/CARR/research/researchThemes/performanceAc
countabilityAndInformation.htm#top
Accessed 23 Junly 2009

Weitzner, D. 2007. Information Accountability. USA: Cambridge

Witty, B. 2008. Accountability Principles for Research Organisations. UK: One World
Trust