From Voice ~ Topics: criticism, journals
Blogs vs. Mags
For designers this has clear and obvious ramifications. But for design writers it has also begun to change some of the rules of engagement.
Who would have imagined over a decade ago when critical design writing was just beginning to pick up steam and graphic design periodicals were transformed from purely trade mags into visual culture journals, that ink-on-paper publications would be on the endangered species list?
Despite certain wailings in the '90s about the “end of print,” many presumed it was specious talk—a phrase coined to shiver our collective timbers—but had little real impact on our immediate future. Today, however, although print may not be totally obsolete, critical design writing is fast migrating onto the Internet and to blogs in particular. This migration is destined in the short term to change the ways writers write, readers read, and design news and criticism is received. Is it a revolution?
At a recent SeriouSeries panel discussion held in New York devoted to design book publishing organized by the blogmasters at Speak Up, the inevitable question about the impact of the web on writers and writing elicited what for me was a depressing response by Michael Bierut, co-founder of the blog Design Observer and a frequent contributor to design magazines. “I will never write for a print magazine again,” he said. His reasoning was that lead times, especially for the bi-monthly and monthly design magazines, can actually be as long as four to six months before a story sees print, and by then it is likely an original idea will have turned stale. Conversely, blogs are instant transmitters of thought and, more importantly, forums for instantaneous response. The downside is obvious: In the heat of the moment there is less time to massage a piece of prose before, as Bierut notes, he “just hits the publish button.” The gratification, however, far outweighs some craft issues. Nonetheless, as panelist Kevin Lippert, publisher of Princeton Architectural Press noted “the writing is getting much better.” Bloggers are learning to both think and write in a speedy manner. The real deadlines on blogs are to say something before someone else says it first.
I suppose there is much to laud in this new publishing paradise. Design Observer, Speak Up and Voice have attracted some seasoned writers, while giving needed opportunities for neophytes to strengthen their writing muscles. Despite a few insufferable rants, blog content is now often as sophisticated and informative as any design magazine, sometimes even more entertaining. Blogs have also proven that, unlike newsgroups, the writing is not entirely unedited and can be quite complex. For that matter, not all print periodicals, despite extended lead times and editing staff, are always well edited. For some writers the early blog-world was a dump for copy that could not be in print, but now it is a viable primary destination for a growing number of writers and thinkers. The immediate action and reaction endemic to posting a story may be seductive, but it is also productive as a generator for useful debate and a test market for ideas before they go to print.
Still, I'm torn. I love seeing a new issue of a magazine come shrink-wrapped in the mail or appear like a newly blooming flower (sorry for the florid metaphor) on the stands. I anticipate opening it and seeing the layout with my story for the first time, which is often a pleasant surprise. I revel in reading it over because on the printed page it is a totally different piece of writing than as a manuscript (or on the computer screen). I feel happy turning the pages and closing the cover and putting it either on the desk or in the bookshelf. These are tactile sensations that are as much habit as anything but it is experience couched in a tradition of reading and writing that goes back ages. Frankly, I also like the fact that, once it is in print it can’t be changed, so I can stop thinking about it and move on to other obsessions.
But there is more. As a design writer I’m not simply mechanically funneling words and thoughts onto a page, I’m marrying text and image in both word and deed. Even those essays or critiques that need not be illustrated are about ultimately about visual matters. For me the layout is as important in conveying the ideas as the words. While the web can be a phenomenally rich visual environment, I do not get the same typographical joy from the web as that on paper when all the layout elements are in sync. On the web, type often changes and layouts are reconfigured depending on the browser. Reading and seeing a blog story (or even a Voice story) on the screen is too ephemeral. In a way it doesn’t really exist, and may not exist in perpetuity, at least that is my fear.
Perhaps design writing for blogs demands a different rigor than design writing for print. And perhaps this may be a good thing for the field. What must be conveyed on the web may require more personality, more clarity, and more vivid descriptions to offset the absence of what is taken for granted in a print environment. But ever since the dawn of machines, artists and designers (i.e. William Morris) have lamented the loss of value at the expense of speed. While the web is a boon to design writers and writing, and the dissemination of ideas to more than the traditional design reader audience, I refuse to accept that our magazines will ultimately be vestigial. Speed is not the only virtue. Blogs demand immediate everything—writing, reading, responding—magazines allow contemplation. Its good to have both, but I hope that the Bieruts out there will not limit their writing to just one medium simply because they get a rush from the one and are impatient with the other.
-
I read blogs, I read magazines, I read books. I read blogs, magazines, and books that have something and nothing to do with design. I notice a qualitative distinction between and inside all these media. Depending on the blog the writing is better or worse than a magazine's, of course the quality of the magazine is relative too. Its ALL relative. But I don't think that one medium will supplant the other right now. I do believe that we're now in a time of DIY criticism. Anyone can post full-blown critiques of design things on blogs and be taken seriously. That's a good thing. But even on blogs I see a selection process occuring. Maybe its easier to get published on the blogs, but recently intelligence is a key factor.
-
I think it is the success of blogs, rather than their failure, that guarantees the future of the magazine. The rate at which content can accumulate on a blog as well as the diversity of voices contributing that content make blogs a perfect way of gathering a diverse perspectives. But blogs are a lousy way of presenting extended analysis of a particular issue. For one thing, blogs thrive on disagreement. The articles that generate the most comments are not the ones that are the most right but the ones that are wrong in an interesting way. This is great, unless you are actually looking for reliable information.
Many magazines, however, seem to be learning exactly the wrong lesson from the explosion of blogs. They attempt to mirror the brief, fractured presentation of information seen online instead of taking advantage of what Steve points out are the advantages of the print medium: you can stare at it for a long time without getting tired and, at least in theory, you can consider an issue before being distracted by someone elses opinion.
Magazine editors tend to either ignore blogs as beneath their notice or get completely freaked out about "the end of print." What blogs should provide is something the publishing industry in general has been sadly lacking: a window onto their audience. But just because you appreciate the view doesn't mean you have to tear down the house. -
A wonderful response to an ongoing trend, Steven. I too am torn. And while blogs provide immediacy and interaction, you really can't contemplate what you're reading. Sitting in front of the computer to read is akin to sitting in front of the television to read. Projected type demands surfing. So I print out passages and articles I find online if I really want to read them. Nothing will change the intimacy of the printed page, and the feeling of holding words in your hands. Those interactions led me to design. I won't abandon them—I hope.
Blogs succeed in the level of control given to writers and readers. We see new voices and opinions, that would go unnoticed. Does this new medium with its new voices demand visual experimentation? Will we see an Emiblog that's a throwback to what happened with 90s publications? I wonder how valuable readers would find it to have blog's typography, grids, and presentation pushed beyond the standard moveable type templates. But maybe, just maybe, that would demand the deep reading that designers championed in the 90s. Perhaps that's what must happen for us to read instead of surf. -
As the editor of a print magazine (STEP inside design), I’ve struggled with this debate for years. There’s been talk for the last decade that online publications are the future and paper pubs will be obsolete. I refuse to believe this will ever happen (or maybe I’m in denial). People will always want to read printed magazines and books.
However, I think internet blogs are equally important and work hand-in-hand with printed publications. They serve as a dialogue for the design community. I often turn to Voice and Speak Up to keep up with current conversations about design. As Steven stated, blogs are “productive as a generator for useful debate and a test market for ideas before they go to print.” Many of the debates and ideas on these sites deserve more investigation and analysis--this can best be achieved in a print publication where pages can be dedicated to the subject and visuals can be used to illustrate the topic.
Although the information in a magazine may not be as current as something posted online, something printed on a page leaves a lasting impression. Things come and go so quickly online, that I often can’t remember where I read something and I can’t refer back to it when I need it. I also feel there’s more validity to something printed in a magazine. There’s a writer who researches a topic and/or interviews people; there’s an editorial staff that checks information and proofs and edits content for clarity and style; and there’s an art director who ensures the copy and accompanying visuals are presented in a way that’s aesthetically pleasing and informative. This process takes time.
Although I do try to present relevant topics in STEP, the information is meant to be something readers engage with, think about, and refer to on occasion. For instance, Michael Bierut (along with several other designers) recently wrote a piece for STEP about the album covers that influenced and inspired him both musically and artistically. This story isn’t timely. In fact, it’s 40 years in the making—but it’s still relative.
My point is that magazines and blogs serve different purposes, and in many cases, different audiences. Blogs provide instant communication and information, but there’s a tactile pleasure in holding and smelling (yes, I like the smell of the ink) and turning the pages of a magazine. -
> I also feel there’s more validity to something printed in a magazine.
And, that exactly, is the stigma of blogs and pretty much anything produced specifically for web delivery. Would this new AIGA VOICE be more "valid" if it were printed and distributed just like the AIGA Journal in the good ol' days? Simply because production costs are much much lower with web publications it seems easy to see them as less valid. However I do not disagree completely with this notion. There *is* something about things in print that just give it that extra... something.
The tension (both good and bad) between magazines and blogs is interesting. The conversations on blogs are the envy of any "Readers Respond" section of any magazine, of course magazines are not built around readers responses, but there is enough interest in them that all magazines include them. But this might not be too big a bragging point for us bloggers. I do find immediacy a big plus for blogs and even though most publishers will scoff off the notion of presenting dated content I guess it really is a big concern. Old news is old news no matter how glossy the paper is. As one example: By the time CommArts published a review of AIGA's Vancouver Conference we had already posted five lengthy reviews AND done a seriouSeries about it. On the flip side, blogs don't have the experiential quality that a magazine does, you can't take a blog with you on the subway nor, you know, to the John, you can't dog-ear it, etc. (BUT, there are NO 130 lb paper samples in blogs!). Magazines have an innate quality to them that comes from its reality, its presence and its existence in the tangible world. A blog will never match that.
Content is definitely more "rushed" in blogs and that leads to incomplete thoughts but there is a lot to be found from on-the-fly commentary: it's raw, it's unedited and it reveals just a tiny bit more about the person writing than a heavily-edited article.
Blogs will not replace magazines, in fact blogs won't replace anything except themselves. I also think the term blog – as it was originally used – does not apply anymore to sites like Speak Up, VOICE or Design Observer. Sites like these go beyond chronological musings of a teenager. These -- and other sites -- are serious ventures that are furthering their respective professions. But this may be another issue altogether. -
Armin's comment: "but there is a lot to be found from on-the-fly commentary: it's raw, it's unedited and it reveals just a tiny bit more about the person writing than a heavily-edited article" remind me of the dawn of "the new journalism.
When writers like Tom Wolfe introduced the first person to reported pieces some journalists forcasted the end of objective reporting. Obviously nothing is further from the truth. It simply opened another avenue for reporting and commentary - call it a style, method, or manner, it is now part of the diet of journalism.
Similarly the blog (or whatever it will be called in the future - Armin here's your chance to coin a new word) will open other mainstream opportunities. -
As Malcolm Gladwell states, "...which is really key—how we communicate, or what we communicate?" And speaking of Gladwell, maybe he's already come up with a nickname for this blog thing. He tends to create catchy labels here and there that "stir up conversation," as he puts it.
-
It strikes me that one thing always gets left out of this discussion, as though any mention of it were taboo. But it is actually fundamental to the whole issue of writing and, if we seriously want good design writing, it cannot be avoided.
I'm talking about the issue of payment.
The fundamental problem with blogging as a putative writer's medium is that it doesn't pay. All writers, in the history of writing, have required payment. Why should we expect it to be otherwise? Every other line of work is paid. Only people with alternative forms of income can afford to give their writing away, but totally committed writers, serious writers, cannot afford to do this. Those who settle for less simply confirm their amateur status. Sorry, but it's true. Ask some real writers outside of design writing.
Those full-time writers who support independent blogging -- because for now at least it's exciting to do so -- do it by subsidising it out of other income. In my own case, this is mainly writing for magazines. Thank God for magazines!
Voice is in a peculiar halfway position. It isn't a blog. It exists as an extension of the AIGA and it replaces the printed AIGA Journal and the shortlived Trace. It pays, unlike Design Observer or Speak Up, but considerably less than it used to pay for printed contributions. In other words, it asks writers to accept a pay cut. I assume the AIGA pays what it can, but if this is the new medium, then you can kiss goodbye to serious, committed design writing before it has even left the nursery because no one who wants to be a writer first and foremost will be able to afford it. -
Rick's point is accurate.
Without the revenue stream generated by advertising or subsidy there can be no payment for web contributions. Of course, Salon and other leading webzines and extensions of larger magazines or newspapers pay reasonable wages for reporters, essayists, and columnists. BUT design writing is not paid at a scale comparable to other writers in other fields.
Indeed, most design magazines are well under scale of feature or column writers for general and niche publishing. Most advances for books are low. Some design publishers even forego advances altogether. Some magazines pay as low as 25 cents a word, if that.
But this is bigger story. The subject also came up during the SeriouSeries symposium on design books. And the conclusion was:
Whether on the web or in print design writing and especially design criticism will never become more than a hobby for many of its practitioners until it is seriously valued and paid for. So far, and for the past dozen or so years writers have been hardpressed to make a respectable living, and that is certainly one reason why there are so few truly serious writers today. -
Part 2: Still writers continue to write.
For some teaching subsidizes (and demands) writing. For others their design jobs and offices pay the bills that writing cannot pay. Rick is a fulltime design writer/critic, so the issue of payment is acute for him (and others who would like nothing more than to spend their energies doing this). Nonetheless, Rick is a founding member of DesignObserver because rather than fees or salary he is investing in the future of this new medium and testing the waters for new writing. It is a choice.
Of course, there are also less altruistic reasons for accepting the low fees (or honoraria), but most who write, myself included, are passionate about exploring this rich vein of the popular culture motherlode. Indeed graphic design leads to and intersects with so many other components of the culture that there is a wealth of possibility, even if wealth itself is not in the cards. -
If you start at 10, where 10 is the best paid writer with the best qualifications within the best context and you start substracting circumstances you get the blog situation:
Minus 1 point: writing for the web (and a blog at that)
Minus 3 points: writing about graphic design
Minus 5 points: doing it out of love
You end with 1 point: it exists.
In contrast to Rick, two years ago I had nothing to lose and only amateurism to gain. Luckily, it paid out – but not financially, at least not yet.
Making a living as a writer about graphic design seems as probable as winning a Powerball in the Midwest.
Nonetheless, we still do it. -
"All writers, in the history of writing, have required payment. Why should we expect it to be otherwise? Every other line of work is paid. Only people with alternative forms of income can afford to give their writing away, but totally committed writers, serious writers, cannot afford to do this. Those who settle for less simply confirm their amateur status."
I just finished reading a book of letters written by Walter Benjamin to people like Bertolt Brecht and Rainer Maria Rilke. These letters are stunning: full of valuable insight and no less carefully composed than his books and essays despite the fact that they were done for free. Through these letters one can see Benjamin testing out ideas that would later develop into his greatest work.
It seems to me that blogs--and especially blogs like Design Observer which are restricted to specific writers--are a similar sort of correspondence. For the priviledge of getting feedback from others Benjamin sacrificed his right to be paid for his labor. If the letters had been end rather than the means and Benjamin had never developed his ideas further, then the letters would have been a bad bargain. But if he had refused to spend hours slaving over these letters because he wasn't getting paid, then he may never have gained the insights he needed to create his masterpieces.
I think writers need to be very clear what they will get out of writing for a blog. Blogs should be means to an end and the end should be getting compensated for their valuable effort. So far, I think most young writers have underestimated the value of their contributions to blogs. It's a big problem because it is underming their (and Rick and Steve's) ability to get properly paying work. In most cases writers at least know what they are getting themselves in to: they are giving away ideas for free. But maybe Voice has actually muddied the water by paying a little bit for articles, rather than nothing at all? -
"But maybe Voice has actually muddied the water by paying a little bit for articles, rather than nothing at all?"
The rationale for paying an honorarium for VOICE articles, and before it for the AIGA Journal content, is to show respect for our authors, while staying within the means of the institute.
There are many scholarly journals that do not pay for their rigorously edited content. There are various non-academic publications that also pay relatively low for their's. And then there are periodicals that offer a reasonable fee for significant work.
Voice probably has muddied the waters, but in the Internet environment it is a hybrid. It is not a blog, but an online journal of ideas open to any serious contributor (in addition to our regular contributors) that has a interesting point to make and makes it well. We believe that this deserves some recompense but since we are unable to pay to scale, we offer a token. Frankly, I think this symbol of respect and good will is worth doing - whether it muddies the waters or not.
I also believe that having this outlet (and providing a VOICE) is valuable to the design community. It is made so by our contributors who share their work with us for small fees. So, here's good opportunity to thank them in this public forum. -
In a post at Design Observer regarding plagiarism, William Drenttel writes:
"I am not submitting this example of potential plagiarism to Print Magazine because they would take months to publish their findings. There is no inherent benefit to such delay: the conversation is more relevant while this issue of STEP is still on the newsstand."
This is a first-hand example of the Blogs vs. Mags conversation. What is now, wont be, three months from now. I just thought it would be interesting to add to this forum.
http://www.designobserver.com/archives/000258.html -
Lenny makes a good point. But in defense of the paper press, PRINT has consistently published a little feature that I write called SEPARATED AT BIRTH (now called EVOLUTION) for the past five or more years that addresses this very issue of plagiarism and influence - and coincidence. It serves as a design observer. PRINT has also, in the past, published articles on plagiarism.
On the same theme, Julie Lasky and I wrote a book called BORROWED DESIGN ( http://www.bookworkz.com/education/graphic_design/0471284408.html ) which also deals in depth with these concerns as practical matters of design practice.
The blog format allows participants to report, respond, vent, rant, critique immediately. Bill Drenttel's post is thoughtful and immediate, but perhaps with more time and another layer of editorial oversight he might have looked upon his examples differently. Certainly the responses to his post were mixed about the voracity of his charges.
Again, it is a great thing to start a discussion of this kind. But I believe the commentary would have had a different response and resonance in PRINT or in STEP or any other paper medium. The interactivity might have been lost, but essay might be less ephemeral. -
I must admit the brand new redesign of Print, along with the continuing excellence of ID and the relevance of Emigre in whatever incarnation it chooses (just to name a few) are signs that magazines aren't to be counted out just yet, regardless of what people like me might blurt out in the heat of the moment.
I may be biased because I know and admire the issue's designer, but it's been a long time since I read Print from cover to cover as I did the new issue. A new format can make such a difference. -
The recent squabble (debate/forum) at Design Observer over the two bird pictures (mentioned below by Lenny Naar), is an example of how the license to post a critique in haste and without editorial guidance can result in irresponsible public communications. The blogs may provide a lot of advantages, like speed and candor, but introspection is lost while posturing is gained. The post results in great theatrics, but I trust the editorial authority more.
-
The essence of a blog is all about creating a populist dialog. The problem of "editorial guidance" is that it can, and perhaps tends to, stifle free and open communication. In a magazine we only read information that's been scrubbed by editors and lawyers. And too often it's overly influenced by advertisers.
The "plagarism" conversation on Design Observer is a fine example of how the weblog system of communication is distinctly different, but works and should be cherished. It allows all readers to participate and be part of the process. That's democracy in action — everyone gets to be part of the editorial process. And that never happens in print. It can't.
William Drenttel put me and thousands of others in a instant position of responsibility. That responsibility isn't always respected. But each reader/participant is allowed to judge the value of each comment on its own merit and ignore it, respond to it, respect it, reject it, etc.
The blog is revolutionary. The blog is democratic. Long live the blog. -
It is a revolution. It used to be freedom of the press was applicable to anyone who owned a press. Now everyone owns a digital press/radio/video and the means of distribution. Also anyone who has the pretense to be a commentator, pundit, or provacateur can print, say, or show something on blogs. Mixed blessings I say. DO has some very interesting, at times indepth, discussions, and the recent bird posts show there is a self-editing mechanism - kind of. I wonder, though, if the original went to PRINT or another magazine whether or not they would have vetted it better to avoid embarassment to all parties, or because it is "commentary" would the accusations have been published? In any case its all very interesting.
-
FYI: Today's Wall Street Journal discusses the evolving ethics and responsibilities of blog journalism.
-
No need to apologize. I quite like how you liken the covers of periodicals to flowers. Lately I've been buying more flowers and enjoying the ones we grow in the garden, too.
Does the term Webzine not work for us? These online forums could become print-like in that they’d have separately-designed pdfs available after a sufficient time has passed for the editing and proof-reading to have taken place. Call it the webiodicals section because the corrections to posted articles are made periodically or simply because you want to have time to smell the roses -just call your web presence a webiodical.
Most would agree the raw first postings should remain as the ‘live’ thing (?) that it is (once logged -they are) and we all know that every one of us will write imperfectly. We could expect it from Voice, for example -to make this writing ‘printable’ after it has prepared such a version (strike the extra ‘about’ in the next-to-last paragraph) and perhaps married a real visual to Steve’s words in a downloadable file. -
When will blogs become books?
I can see some of the more popular blogs being (re)published in a book format.
I wonder...
© 2008 AIGA | 164 Fifth Avenue New York NY 10010 | 212 807 1990
Comments