Shameless arrogant self promotion or a genuine heartfelt appeal?
Out of context: Reply #52
- Started
- Last post
- 85 Responses
- hellobotto0
Given the tone of some comments so far, I feel compelled to preface with a note that I'm one of the many folks whose trying to raise money for relief efforts by offering items.
I choose to err on the side the designers' intentions are on the side of charity and not shameless self-promotion PROVIDED:
- They allow reputable entities to freely raise funds off their work. If the Red Cross wants to leverage the popularity of your design, then you should be willing to give it up. It's fine if they want to give you a nod, but nothing more because who cares who made it provided it's helping people.
- They provide a heads up to people if they can't secure 0% overhead. The means to produce the items I'm selling currently aren't free of production costs. Since I've been unable to get free and clear production, I'm including a disclaimer wherever possible recommending folks donate directly to a preferred charity in order to maximize their donation. It's only right you disclose as much as possible so folks looking to donate are fully informed. In the end, if a sale only generates a dollar to donate, that's still a dollar more than doing nothing...it's then just a matter of trying to promote efficiency in the process.
- They don't use the artwork in a case study. If the designer/artist wasn't solicited by a charity, then it's in poor taste to use a crisis like this as a long standing case study to try to win yourself work. You don't put on your resume how many pints of blood you donated each year in order to give yourself an edge. When it comes to this kind of effort, the designer/artist should try to be as invisible as possible.
- They make themselves available to anyone who may have a civil question about their intentions. If you're willing to put yourself out there for charity, then you're willing to put yourself out there to be held reasonably accountable. You ask a lot of folks when you ask for a donation; you shouldn't be put off when they demand understanding from you.
This all being said, I'd be curious what kind of thought leadership could come out of transforming a debate like this (a debate I've heard during the peak of AIDS awareness efforts in the 80s/90s, Katrina, the flooding in Iowa and Tennessee, etc.) from a question of "tacky vs. thoughtful" into "how can we do more through design?" and "what more can design do beyond printed materials and swag?" There's a lot of individual soapbox comments in this thread, but how could we use that skepticism to drive some constructive innovation?
I agree, a well-designed poster advertising a charity blood drive would be better than a screenprinted, letterpressed, double-embossed with a clear varnish poster of a red circle. So can we hear more of those ideas from the creative thinkers that make up this community? Otherwise this conversation is just self-righteousness for the sake of being self-righteous.
- thanks for presenting your point of view in a reasonable manner.********
- thanks for presenting your point of view in a reasonable manner.