Bibliography:  

Davidson, J. (1984) This is not a manifesto: ideas towards an alternative design practice. Cantebury N.Z: Garage Collective  

Castañeda, Luis M. (2014) Spectacular Mexico: Design, Propaganda, and the 1968 Olympics. U.S.A: University of Minnesota Press 

﷟HYPERLINK "https://www.google.co.uk/search?tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=inauthor:%22Rachel+Cooper%22"Cooper, R. Jacobs, N. (2018), Living in Digital Worlds: Designing the Digital Public UK: Routledge 

What should a designer consider when making something for a public space, or a gathering 
of a community? 

Designers must consider their influence within the public space 

‘The integrity of design work proceeds from the understanding that every decision by one human being on behalf of another has an implicit cultural history.’ ( N. Potter)  

Designers are often overlooked in the skill set they provide to society. The thought that humans can be influenced merely by how an idea is presented to them is perhaps undermining, surely we would look through the frivolous designs and understand the deeper meaning. And yet, it is much harder than that, as designers we must consider the influence created when putting something into a public space. ‘The integrity of design work proceeds from the understanding that every decision by one human being on behalf of another has an implicit cultural history.’ Our work holds more influence and means more than most would want it to. Norman Potters talks of ‘implicit cultural history’ in regard to design choices, implicating that we have the power to shape and create how the world is perceived.  

To understand the impact of designing within public space, we should first consider public space- the physical. To lookback on society and see ways in which design has influenced either in a positive or negative light.  The most obvious choice to demonstrate this would be war time propaganda, allowing for.  

In particular this case considers designs influence for a community. Mexico ‘68 Olympics, it’s city newly emerging as industry boomed, hosted the Olympics for the first time. A rebrand for the city was needed for the event, an open call for designers to be a part of this regeneration was created. Designer Lance Wyman created a logo that modernised old traditional style and the typeface was plastered around the city. The bright designs couldn’t mask the cities larger problems, students began protesting and the Polices responses were becoming more and more violent, resulting in the Tlatelolco massacre, just 10 days before the ‘Game of Peace’ was due to begin ‘Soldiers opened fire on the students.  The scene was cleared before there could be an accurate body count, but estimates range up into the hundreds.’(99% invisible).  Wyman continued to create content for the government whilst aware of the deaths it now represented saying “it was a very difficult situation because I was working for the government and I couldn’t do anything about it,”. The students began defacing his work to more accuratley represent the reality of the city. (PICTURE). Of course, the designer could be said to be unaware of what the government represented or what would happen after he signed the contract, but it brings to question, should designers be held accountable for working with groups that are responsible for such horrendous events. To help further an agenda of a brutal government seems criminal. Wyman was from New York, not Mexico. He perhaps wouldn’t understand the social impact designing for the Olympics would create. The influence of a designer not being culturally aware of their work is a major issue, designers must consider their social impact on a public space. Designing to represent a community and the said community then deface the designs, it seems almost satirical to try and ignore the impact of designers. Designs help to create a narrative own identity plays into on the community.  

In 1964, just four years prior to this event, a group of designers in London called for a ‘shift in Graphic Design priorities’ by signing the ‘First things first manifesto’. This was deemed necessary due to the graphics market been overly saturated in consumerism ETC ADD SOMETHING HERE>>> The forty something individuals created this small document highlighting important issues ‘to some extent we are all helping draft a reductive and immeasurably harmful code of public discourse.’ This relates back to Norman Potter’s point at the start of the essay; we as designers must take responsibility for our influence on shaping the world we live in, ‘harmful code of public discourse’ is created from the work we put into the public space. Advertisements, articles even SOMETHI account to a social impact far greater than we would expect. 

Next, we must consider designers in more recent times, using digital public space. Public space the physical and digital are almost inseparable in the current day and age. However, there is one major distinction: digital public space is in fact very individualistic, through use of cookies and personalised ads, this design can be very influential in creating a narrative in what is expected to be a communal space, a shared experience. This is seen through the Cambridge Analitica law case. The data from our online activity is being used in a ‘trillion-dollar industry’, from we are assigned personality types and therefore how we are likely to be persuaded to do certain things. (The Great Hack.) Cambridge Analitica used this during the 2016 U.S elections, they targeted ‘swing states’ (states that are equally divided between Democrats and Republicans), then used Facebook to plague any ‘persuadable’ citizens through personalised advertisements. Videos ranging from acts of terrorism to Hillary Clinton’s coughing fit, all with the ulterior motive to persuade people to vote Republican. Only after the damage had been done did some of the designers begin to question the ethics their work. Design can be much more than simply posters and logos. Though here are some examples of those used during the campaign., 

Notice the difference in wording and imagery, different designs are targeted to different audiences. This technique is also used by large corporations such as Netflix. (REFEFEREnce needed ). Yet perhaps using psychological techniques is more accepted when used to persuade its audience to watch a movie, rather than misleading their presidential vote. It is sadly expected that the government will try to mislead their people, rather than questioned. Newspapers have been a vehicle through which this happens for decades. Propaganda is nothing new -- seen throughout the world since the early days of mass media. Looking back to America during an earlier campaign for George W. Bush, we can see another example of designer's influence on public opinions. It’s thought that ‘American corporate media were "cheerleaders" for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and did not provide an accurate or objective analysis, supporting his campaign and resulting in thousands of deaths’ (WIKI) In particular, The New York Times, a highly influential newspaper in America, were seen to be at the forefront of supporting war time efforts. The article, ‘war is beautiful’ demonstrates how effective design can be to influence the public. A collection of images photographed throughout the war with subject matters including orphaned children and car bombs. The impact of such articles seems to desensitize the public and help to promote a pro war agenda. It doesn’t stop there. Countless other articles are seen to support the war without questioning the altera motives. (INSERT REFERENCE). The designers of these medias have saturated their audiences lives with tactical information that allows them to create a false narrative. Infact, a survey questioning how American’s perceived the war acts compared to other countries shows a complete bias9/11 doc  The term freedom of speech comes to mind, of course designers can create this work but without the balance of other opinions, the government funding this tunnel vision mindset, the impact on a community of users or readers is manipulative, it warps their idea of what is right through misleading their idea of what should be fact. The public space in American society both digitally and physically has been manipulated to further an agenda, though this is not limited the U.S borders. It seems as though Cambridge Analytica worked in the pro-leave Brexit campaign and around the globe in fact. We as designers again must consider the social and political impact of the design we create for a public space. Of course, campaigns are made to be persuasive, to bring an audience in, to think a certain way. Yet, designs that are in public space shouldn’t perhaps have this dictator style censorship on facts. Designers can often hide behind the idea they aren’t ‘in control’, they are just ‘trying to make money’, they simply work for the company, ‘they don’t represent their own core beliefs’. However, even if they don’t agree with the work they are making, they are influencing a large audience to be complicit in this. The duty of the designer is to respect the public space they are working in and consider the responsibility in doing so. Propaganda to an extent is expected, but there is perhaps no lawful way of condoning designers work that completely warps public beliefs.  

Currently, due to COVID-19 we have found ourselves in the midst of a pandemic. We are in a lockdown with no seeming end. Designers considering their influence on public space, whilst no longer being allowed in public. Rather than looking further into the negative aspects of design influence, how have designers worked with the government to creative something of positive affect. There has been an increased effort to get the public to wash their hands properly during the pandemic, to slow the spread of the virus. Across the globe, different designs have been used to illustrate this and one company took the time to compare and investigate which designs were most useful. It involved 2,600 UK adults and tested 7 posters from the UK, Singapore, Italy, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, and the World Health Organisation. The designs were step by step instructions, translated into English. (The behaviour insights team). The results found ‘To encourage thorough handwashing in the global fight against coronavirus, we recommend bright infographics with the step-by-step procedure prominently displayed without too much accompanying text.’ Simple design techniques can have a major impact on the effect of posters, it’s important that designs used in the public space utilize simple methods- if wanting to communicate effectively. A large audience, diverse as the UK is, must be able to create a concise message with accessible language and imagery to be understood clearly. The NHS has used designs that are simple to replicate and therefore allows the message to be spread with ease. These posters have been plastered on billboards across the country, although due to the lack of outdoor movement, the government issued posters have worked their way into other aspects of ‘space’. ‘Stay home, save lives’ has been seen on every TV advertisement break, in between Instagram posts, and as text messages to every person in the country. It is interesting to consider whether this is public space or not. With the ban of using public space we look to other gatherings of people, almost any digital resource than can be accessed of watched by anyone could in fact be public space in essence. We have to reimagine what we consider to be public space in order to keep an idea of community together.  

This reimagined public space was utilized by United Nations in creating its first ever open call for artists to help convey key messages surrounding COVID-19 to the public. These included hygiene, social distancing, basic symptom knowledge and 3 other messages(UN websute). Creatives had two weeks to use any media they so wished but were asked to keep it simple and legible. The project highlighted a shift from Government graphics designed to be printed and reproduced, to work made to be shared digitally in a more desperate times. Although thist also highlighted a common issue for designers, a lack of respect for artists. Time and time again, briefs are set for creatives 'to win'... nothing? No money, no funding just exposure that is credited once and used a multitude of times. Artists deserve to get paid, especially in uncertain times, reducing hours of creativity into a competition merely setts the design world back further.  

Yet, as COVID-19 is a time of need, I guess artists around the world, coming together to help spread awareness of important topics is quite heroic and telling of the public. 

Designers working with positions of power must consider the influence their designs can have on public spaces. Looking to past and present examples, it’s clear designs have the power to manipulate, to persuade but also to save people. What we understand, what we notice perhaps even our actions are informed by a multitude of design choices. It is easy to sit back as a designer and work for an organisation or a government like Wyman did in Mexico ‘68 and not consider the consequence of hurting a community. To make something in a public space physical or metaphorical, the designer must consider not only their influence, but the social and political impact of the actions.