Inform & Entertain
Using design to communicate information through infographics.
Francesco Franchi: On Visual Storytelling and New Languages in Journalism from Gestalten on Vimeo.
 |
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 posts categorized "branding"
Feb 08, 2012
Jan 03, 2012
Skewing Truth With Design
Dartmouth College Political Scientists recently released a report saying that infographics might be the best way to alter peoples beliefs about a particular subject. More specifically, they were looking at two items, 1. "people tend to resist unwelcome information", and 2. "whether graphical corrections may be more effective than text" at changing peoples minds. What they found: "Graphical corrections are also found to successfully reduce incorrect beliefs among potentially resistant subjects and to perform better than an equivalent textual correction."
Well, duh! Designers have known this for decades. This is how we get you to buy a coke, think Target clothes are cool and convince you to buy a product you don't need. Design is a visual solution to deliver information. However, when that information is handled poorly or in a misleading manner it becomes propaganda.
Bloomberg's Businessweek created a nice example of how easy it is to visually skew non-related data to mislead consumers into false conclusions. These are pretty funny but they do illustrate a real truth of how design could transform into propaganda.
One of my favorite books dealing with this issue is by Edward R Tufte. In The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, Tufte deals extensively with the propensity of designers to unknowingly (or knowingly) skew data when compiling it visually. Trying to make data fun or decorative lends itself to creating propaganda if the information is not properly cared for and treated with great respect.
Tufte goes into great detail along with real world examples of how data should be treated and displayed to attain the most unbiased positions possible. An obvious must read for anyone creating infographics, but more importantly a must read for anyone who is interested in being able to recognize false information and disseminate the truth.
Obviously people look at graphics before digging into text. We are visual creatures. The old example was a newspaper - have you ever read the entire thing, or just flipped through to find something interesting? Now its, do you read all the text on all the websites you visit - or just look for something interesting and then dig in? Why does a book have a fancy cover and not simply the first page of text from the book?
A better study for Dartmouth might have been to calculate the percentage of false information that is communicated through misleading graphics instead of trying to decide if design works.
Well, duh! Designers have known this for decades. This is how we get you to buy a coke, think Target clothes are cool and convince you to buy a product you don't need. Design is a visual solution to deliver information. However, when that information is handled poorly or in a misleading manner it becomes propaganda.
Bloomberg's Businessweek created a nice example of how easy it is to visually skew non-related data to mislead consumers into false conclusions. These are pretty funny but they do illustrate a real truth of how design could transform into propaganda.
One of my favorite books dealing with this issue is by Edward R Tufte. In The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, Tufte deals extensively with the propensity of designers to unknowingly (or knowingly) skew data when compiling it visually. Trying to make data fun or decorative lends itself to creating propaganda if the information is not properly cared for and treated with great respect.
Tufte goes into great detail along with real world examples of how data should be treated and displayed to attain the most unbiased positions possible. An obvious must read for anyone creating infographics, but more importantly a must read for anyone who is interested in being able to recognize false information and disseminate the truth.
Obviously people look at graphics before digging into text. We are visual creatures. The old example was a newspaper - have you ever read the entire thing, or just flipped through to find something interesting? Now its, do you read all the text on all the websites you visit - or just look for something interesting and then dig in? Why does a book have a fancy cover and not simply the first page of text from the book?
A better study for Dartmouth might have been to calculate the percentage of false information that is communicated through misleading graphics instead of trying to decide if design works.
Dec 22, 2011
Small Businesses & Domain Name Strategy
In the past few months I have sat down with several small business owners looking to kick off their online presence. Typically these clients have little to no money and just need something - anything - online that makes them look more legit than just having a business card.
Concerning selecting a name for the business domain… Usually business owners have an idea in mind of what they want, normally they have been through a hundred names on Godaddy only to find out that Name.com is taken and is for sale for $100,000. Discouraging as this may seem it really presents a great opportunity to capitalize on a longer domain name that could actually be more relevant in a niche market.
Everything goes back to the user so when selecting a potential name, I like to recommend imagining how people search using Google. While there is obviously something to be said for having a short memorable name there is also an equal if not greater argument for selecting a domain that coincides with how people search.
For instance, pretend sites with close to identical information on each site: GlobalTextiles.com vs. CustomRestaurantUniforms.com (just fake examples)
People will inevitably search for terms like "Custom Restaurant Uniforms" and Google will index such a site with a domain that is a search term much higher. People will rarely search "Global Textiles" looking for custom-made restaurant uniforms, and those that do search for "Global Textiles" might be looking for info on world textile import/exports or some other materials. Even if the legal company name was "Global Textiles Inc." a different website name (or sub-site) with a more specific product domain name to the actual product is going to yield a higher return for smaller businesses with little to no brand recognition and marketing budgets. Additionally this more generic domain could actually be more memorable when speaking with potential leads.
Just something to keep in mind while spending nights searching for the next cool.com domain name and when really trying to utilize the internet to your sales advantage. And also remember, if you are not updating your site's content regularly then it doesn't matter what you name it. Your dusty old site with a recent post from a year and a half ago is pretty much worthless and showing up on page 12 of googles search results. You could pretty much rename it turd.com cause that is about all its worth. (And incase you are wondering, yes turd.com is taken - but available for the low low price of only…)
Concerning selecting a name for the business domain… Usually business owners have an idea in mind of what they want, normally they have been through a hundred names on Godaddy only to find out that Name.com is taken and is for sale for $100,000. Discouraging as this may seem it really presents a great opportunity to capitalize on a longer domain name that could actually be more relevant in a niche market.
Everything goes back to the user so when selecting a potential name, I like to recommend imagining how people search using Google. While there is obviously something to be said for having a short memorable name there is also an equal if not greater argument for selecting a domain that coincides with how people search.
For instance, pretend sites with close to identical information on each site: GlobalTextiles.com vs. CustomRestaurantUniforms.com (just fake examples)
People will inevitably search for terms like "Custom Restaurant Uniforms" and Google will index such a site with a domain that is a search term much higher. People will rarely search "Global Textiles" looking for custom-made restaurant uniforms, and those that do search for "Global Textiles" might be looking for info on world textile import/exports or some other materials. Even if the legal company name was "Global Textiles Inc." a different website name (or sub-site) with a more specific product domain name to the actual product is going to yield a higher return for smaller businesses with little to no brand recognition and marketing budgets. Additionally this more generic domain could actually be more memorable when speaking with potential leads.
Just something to keep in mind while spending nights searching for the next cool.com domain name and when really trying to utilize the internet to your sales advantage. And also remember, if you are not updating your site's content regularly then it doesn't matter what you name it. Your dusty old site with a recent post from a year and a half ago is pretty much worthless and showing up on page 12 of googles search results. You could pretty much rename it turd.com cause that is about all its worth. (And incase you are wondering, yes turd.com is taken - but available for the low low price of only…)
Jul 26, 2011
Sans-Serif For President?!?
With the upcoming election just 16 months away, the public is about to be littered with poorly designed political posters and propaganda from Local and State Government to the GOP Presidential candidates and then the final showdown.
I decided to take a look back through the last 13 election cycles, beginning with Kennedy's campaign in 1960. Spanning the course of over 50 years, these campaigns existed through a tremendous time of technological growth - yet overall it seems that there has been little to no growth design wise. While there are seemingly endless variations of each design for a single campaign, this article will attempt to review the most generic versions of the winners. I omitted a few evaluations that I did like Stacked names vs. Side-by-side, All caps vs. Mixed Case, Justified Alignment vs. Offset, Slogan vs. No Slogan and many other obscure analysis points - with the hope of not making this thing overwhelming.
While there are some interesting similarities here I would not be an advocate of actually using this as a design guideline unless you wanted to create, as I mentioned, a very "boring" poster. It would be nice to see some innovation in this space.
Obviously a campaign actually #winning is not based solely on signage design. However, as with any brand I believe that to the degree at which professionalism is exhibited there is at the very minimum a subconscious impact - just as any product branding would have. With so many other factors at play in a campaign; policy debates, voting records, current issues and events - a cohesively designed campaign would only be necessary checkbox of done correctly. We saw Obama's campaign dominate in this space in the last cycle - probably as the first candidate who's campaign actually understood branding and how it should extend across all efforts, especially through social media.
A polar opposite of this would be the 1988 Dukakis-Bentsen campaign featuring blue text on top of a flag… If a student or employee of mine in all seriousness showed me a design like this I would fail or fire them. Also, I love that the 2000 Gore-Liberman showcased the iconic dot com "Swoosh" - classy.
As one last bonus I couldn't help but tossing in this poster from the 1996 Clinton-Gore campaign. While it might make a fun t-shirt I can't imagine who actually thought this was good bumper sticker design. Unless I know sign language, I would have no idea who this sticker was for - and that is assuming I always carry binoculars in my car to read bumper stickers with tiny, detailed line art.
Perhaps once I have a substancial number of 2012 campaign posters I will post them and do a little analysis/prediction for fun based on their design alone.
I decided to take a look back through the last 13 election cycles, beginning with Kennedy's campaign in 1960. Spanning the course of over 50 years, these campaigns existed through a tremendous time of technological growth - yet overall it seems that there has been little to no growth design wise. While there are seemingly endless variations of each design for a single campaign, this article will attempt to review the most generic versions of the winners. I omitted a few evaluations that I did like Stacked names vs. Side-by-side, All caps vs. Mixed Case, Justified Alignment vs. Offset, Slogan vs. No Slogan and many other obscure analysis points - with the hope of not making this thing overwhelming.
While there are some interesting similarities here I would not be an advocate of actually using this as a design guideline unless you wanted to create, as I mentioned, a very "boring" poster. It would be nice to see some innovation in this space.
Obviously a campaign actually #winning is not based solely on signage design. However, as with any brand I believe that to the degree at which professionalism is exhibited there is at the very minimum a subconscious impact - just as any product branding would have. With so many other factors at play in a campaign; policy debates, voting records, current issues and events - a cohesively designed campaign would only be necessary checkbox of done correctly. We saw Obama's campaign dominate in this space in the last cycle - probably as the first candidate who's campaign actually understood branding and how it should extend across all efforts, especially through social media.
A polar opposite of this would be the 1988 Dukakis-Bentsen campaign featuring blue text on top of a flag… If a student or employee of mine in all seriousness showed me a design like this I would fail or fire them. Also, I love that the 2000 Gore-Liberman showcased the iconic dot com "Swoosh" - classy.
As one last bonus I couldn't help but tossing in this poster from the 1996 Clinton-Gore campaign. While it might make a fun t-shirt I can't imagine who actually thought this was good bumper sticker design. Unless I know sign language, I would have no idea who this sticker was for - and that is assuming I always carry binoculars in my car to read bumper stickers with tiny, detailed line art.
Perhaps once I have a substancial number of 2012 campaign posters I will post them and do a little analysis/prediction for fun based on their design alone.
Jun 03, 2011
Creativity in Business
The word "creative" is an all encompassing term of what we do and how we interact, both personally and in business.
Companies live and die by these primary principles which are all rooted in creativity:
1. The funding necessary to create a product or service
2. The value and quality of the good or service created
3. The effectiveness of marketing the product
4. The experience a consumer has when interacting with the product
5. The likelihood of a consumer to recommend the product to others.
All of these variables are dependent on "creative". Will investor/board presentations effectively communicate the business goals? How will the product or service be designed and built? How will the product be marketed and advertised to consumers in a multitude of ways? What will the actual experience a consumer has with the product be? How likely will consumers be to share it with others? And how will the process be repeated to make continual improvements?
Design & creativity is intrinsic in the core of any business. Often though a business's drive for revenue can usurps this necessity, and lead the company to failure if it is not acted on by an outside force. This is why "fresh blood" is brought in and new thought-leadership is required. The customer is still king, and the product or service still exists for them - more so now than ever as every company and product is discussed and shared instantly with both positive and negative results.
If a product or service remains consumer focused, it will succeed. This is often why new leadership is needed at a company, or the leadership that exists should be continually focused on building a better product - not just a better profit. The profit and product are eqully dependent on one another.
A example of this is Apple Computers and Microsoft. The once tiny Apple facing the giant continually focused on the customer and innovative products while Microsoft focused on profits. Now we view Apple as one of the most successful, innovative and design-centric companies ever and continue to see Microsoft lose ground.
"Creative" is essential to having a successful business. A holistic design-centric approach can be the differentiating factor in ultimate success or ultimate failure.
Companies live and die by these primary principles which are all rooted in creativity:
1. The funding necessary to create a product or service
2. The value and quality of the good or service created
3. The effectiveness of marketing the product
4. The experience a consumer has when interacting with the product
5. The likelihood of a consumer to recommend the product to others.
All of these variables are dependent on "creative". Will investor/board presentations effectively communicate the business goals? How will the product or service be designed and built? How will the product be marketed and advertised to consumers in a multitude of ways? What will the actual experience a consumer has with the product be? How likely will consumers be to share it with others? And how will the process be repeated to make continual improvements?
Design & creativity is intrinsic in the core of any business. Often though a business's drive for revenue can usurps this necessity, and lead the company to failure if it is not acted on by an outside force. This is why "fresh blood" is brought in and new thought-leadership is required. The customer is still king, and the product or service still exists for them - more so now than ever as every company and product is discussed and shared instantly with both positive and negative results.
If a product or service remains consumer focused, it will succeed. This is often why new leadership is needed at a company, or the leadership that exists should be continually focused on building a better product - not just a better profit. The profit and product are eqully dependent on one another.
A example of this is Apple Computers and Microsoft. The once tiny Apple facing the giant continually focused on the customer and innovative products while Microsoft focused on profits. Now we view Apple as one of the most successful, innovative and design-centric companies ever and continue to see Microsoft lose ground.
"Creative" is essential to having a successful business. A holistic design-centric approach can be the differentiating factor in ultimate success or ultimate failure.
May 31, 2011
Building Billion Dollar Brands
What does it take to make a logo for one of the richest companies on earth? What color is best? Sans or Serif font? Type only or a bug as well? Most importantly, how would you make it stand out among the other giants of industry?
Lets take a look at what top companies in the world are doing brand-wise. Unfortunately Forbes hasn't put out a simple 500 list since 2002, so we will use their new list Global 2000. This listing of 2,000 companies from across the globe is based on sales, profits, assets and market value.
We will only look at the top 100 and see what similarities and difference we can find in a simple logo analysis. This won't exactly be apples to apples, as many on the list are not designed exclusively in english, several are larger companies that own multiple sub-brands and I am not using their official brand standards documentation - but a fun research exercise regardless.
Takeaway 1
The list was put out in March of 2011. The funny thing about a list like this is that so much hype is made surrounding it and who is on it, when technically it could (and should?) be constantly updated in realtime. There is no relevance or real purpose now for outdated business information, especially when it concerns financials. This type of information is being calculated across thousands of businesses daily and in real time. Forbes has an opportunity to make a real-time list, one that could be much more robust as well as market integrated.
Takeaway 2
So what? It seems the only real reason this analysis would actually be usable is if you wanted to create a generic looking umbrella brand. However, I would suspect, after hearing Paula Scher give a lecture on creating the Citibank brand which ranks in at #10 on the list of top companies in the world, that a considerable amount of time has gone into the research and somewhat sociological experiments to formulate a logo that they believe will be acceptable to their consumers. Then taking that a step further you could make the argument that if all of these companies did at the very least a minimal amount of research surrounding their logo creation you could derive from it common thematic principles that for the the most part would be true - as far as what world-wide consumers might expect to see in a logo that means success (or domination).
Takeaway 3
At the end of the day, branding and logos are complete and utter garbage if the products and companies they sell are not living up to expectations. Branding really began during the Industrial Revolution, as an attempt by companies to inform users of where their "out of town" product came from, and why they should buy into their product guarantee or promise. As companies grew and grew and outsourced more and more, product quality changed. Leaving many brands hanging onto the only thing they thought they knew which was marketing, and eventually grouping together, being acquired or merged into massive corporations to lower production costs even more. But now as more consumers have wised up, and with the ability to share product experiences on a personal level across the web - what counts more now is the personal story surrounding a product. A brand has almost become more of a quality check box. One, does this company have a realistic identity that I think I could even consider trusting, and two, do I know anyone or can I find someone who has experience with it?
Final Analysis:
Just make a blue and black, san-serif logo with a box, and you are one step closer to world domination. And mediocrity.
Lets take a look at what top companies in the world are doing brand-wise. Unfortunately Forbes hasn't put out a simple 500 list since 2002, so we will use their new list Global 2000. This listing of 2,000 companies from across the globe is based on sales, profits, assets and market value.
We will only look at the top 100 and see what similarities and difference we can find in a simple logo analysis. This won't exactly be apples to apples, as many on the list are not designed exclusively in english, several are larger companies that own multiple sub-brands and I am not using their official brand standards documentation - but a fun research exercise regardless.
Takeaway 1
The list was put out in March of 2011. The funny thing about a list like this is that so much hype is made surrounding it and who is on it, when technically it could (and should?) be constantly updated in realtime. There is no relevance or real purpose now for outdated business information, especially when it concerns financials. This type of information is being calculated across thousands of businesses daily and in real time. Forbes has an opportunity to make a real-time list, one that could be much more robust as well as market integrated.
Takeaway 2
So what? It seems the only real reason this analysis would actually be usable is if you wanted to create a generic looking umbrella brand. However, I would suspect, after hearing Paula Scher give a lecture on creating the Citibank brand which ranks in at #10 on the list of top companies in the world, that a considerable amount of time has gone into the research and somewhat sociological experiments to formulate a logo that they believe will be acceptable to their consumers. Then taking that a step further you could make the argument that if all of these companies did at the very least a minimal amount of research surrounding their logo creation you could derive from it common thematic principles that for the the most part would be true - as far as what world-wide consumers might expect to see in a logo that means success (or domination).
Takeaway 3
At the end of the day, branding and logos are complete and utter garbage if the products and companies they sell are not living up to expectations. Branding really began during the Industrial Revolution, as an attempt by companies to inform users of where their "out of town" product came from, and why they should buy into their product guarantee or promise. As companies grew and grew and outsourced more and more, product quality changed. Leaving many brands hanging onto the only thing they thought they knew which was marketing, and eventually grouping together, being acquired or merged into massive corporations to lower production costs even more. But now as more consumers have wised up, and with the ability to share product experiences on a personal level across the web - what counts more now is the personal story surrounding a product. A brand has almost become more of a quality check box. One, does this company have a realistic identity that I think I could even consider trusting, and two, do I know anyone or can I find someone who has experience with it?
Final Analysis:
Just make a blue and black, san-serif logo with a box, and you are one step closer to world domination. And mediocrity.
May 20, 2011
Joshua Stone
Joshua Stone is an Internet industry executive who is always seeking a new creative challenge. With 18 years of design, marketing and technology experience, he has worked on projects for hundreds of companies including: American Airlines, AT&T, Blockbuster, Cinemark, EDS, Folgers, FOX Sports, Fujitsu, Hotels.com, HP, Motorola, Pampers, PepsiCo, Sony, Southwest Airlines and many more. Joshua also actively creates and shows contemporary fine art nationally. Read more about Joshua's experience.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
