Participatory Culture of Graphic Design - Essay Example

Participatory Culture of Graphic Design Number Department Participatory Culture of Graphic Design The participatory culture of graphic design refers to information generation, reception and critiques by interactive technology platforms. Under the system users enjoy the democracy that comes with their enhanced ability to input new information rather than depend on predetermined information. Previously, visual information, for example, was only effective when an individual saw the message. The recipient of the message could not ‘modify’ the original information. In light of this, graphic design is present in the sense that the information so far received shows a fulfilment of its purpose. Nonetheless, this kind of participation fails to enable the recipient to change the final appearance of the data, or to customize it according to their needs. In the recent past, however, there has been a significant concern among designers to create more interactive graphical interfaces for maximum gains. Otherwise referred to as co-creation, the future of technologies is likely to shift more in the direction of ensuring a greater level of participation by receivers in a way that will make modern technologies virtually owned by end-users. Primary research Since the beginning of the 21st century, and the rapid growth of Internet technologies around the world, there has been a need to create graphic designs that are flexible and more responsive to end-users (Barnes, 2013). Designers and instructors are working around the clock to achieve a complete integration of graphic design and other disciplines such as business. In all of these relationships, there are high chances that the technology trends will continue to evolve, as will the present-day socio-economic, cultural, environmental, and political forces into a more participatory operational context. The current world is witnessing a situation whereby graphical designs and or objects are no longer the ultimate consequence of design practice (Denning, 2013). Neuhauser et al (2009) have noted that, even though, posters, billboards, print media and navigational technologies are still commonly used among graphic designers, designers are more concerned with generating services, graphical experiences, and information that engage the end-user more than ever before. Knowledge integration The rush towards a more participatory project designs based on users’ tastes and preferences is becoming more and more intensified by each passing day. Designers are increasingly seeing the need to create ‘users’ in the current technology era in order to facilitate more human-machine interactions as a way of enhancing efficiency in both the industry and in other disciplines. As Barnes (2013) has established, the perception of user existing within the context of technologies seem to be more fashionable now more than ever before, because of the increasing greater impact of multi-disciplinary and cross-cultural interactions in society. In light of the current quest for democracy, and free speech, Dindler (2010) noted that designers are transforming technologies from one-centred approach to a mutual approach in which end-users would have a greater voice in shaping the functionality of not only technologies through open criticisms and approvals, but also of service provision in society. Today, designers’ quest to operate away from previously one-sided object-orientation of information generation and use toward experiential, more participatory service-oriented approach using modern technologies has been influenced by the need to engage end-users in the digital environment (Bower, 2010). As the global environment and contexts undergo swift evolution, participatory approaches have helped to build closer working ties with parties drawn from other fields other than technology such as ethnography, psychology, policy making and implementation, and human-factor research increases (Neuhauser et al, 2009). This knowledge-based, participatory approach in multi-disciplinary relationships has been widened through participation to encompass targeted segments of the population in a way that has seen unique cultural qualities such as language being retained in the threatening world of globalization. Cultural integration Participatory culture in graphic design has seen design approaches and processes being effectively introduced into other scholarly disciplines for a more synergized, effective world based on informed opinion (Denning, 2013). For example, parties working on a business management practice can involve participatory design mentalities in their practice, since it connects together all stakeholders ranging from suppliers, clients, the professionals and the students (Umoquit et al, 2008). Specifically, unlike most of previously aloof cultural designs, which parties in the corporate world preferred, today’s culture is rapidly moving closer to the social, more participatory environment where the strategic application of business values and design processes require the input of the end-users for successful achievement of planned goals. According to Silva (2012), new design programs are seeking to connect design, business and engineering faculties in order to satisfy public and corporate needs. The business community has employed interactive design technologies to gather market intelligence about new products and market their products to the massive consumer base and prospects that use the technologies (Dindler, 2010). The ensuing collaborative and inclusive business processes have precipitated huge innovation, and massive intelligence gathering approach for 21st century organizations. Virtual connection via Web 2.0 Participatory design culture mainly plays out in web platforms of the 21st century. The digital creation of participatory graphic designs has witnessed the rapid development of web 2.0 as the avenue to, perhaps, the best user inputs (Fang and Strobel, 2011). The current world has been substantially productive in the growth of participatory digital tools, which are presently used in daily interactions under Web 2.0. The use of the platform, triggered by the more prolific use of the Internet technology to obtain cross communications and interactivity of various stakeholders in the society has resulted in the success of organizations that own pages on social media platforms (Bjögvinsson, Ehn and Hillgren, 2012). The use of virtual participatory graphic designs from the Web rather than from installation on computer or technology gadgets has seen the highest empowerment of the end-user to take charge of the web content rather than being the hapless consumer of previous pre-determined information. With a network connection, participatory graphic designs have eliminated the need to install software on remote gadgetry but use them directly online. This has limited the problems that key stakeholders went through ranging from software purchases, the tiresome and time-consuming installation and maintenance processes and the need for a greater amount of memory to ensure success (Poulsen and Thøgersen, 2011). Contrary to the passive use of graphic designs in the form of Websites, participatory approaches have witnessed the development of these applications enable the user to generate part of its data and information, by sharing the material in a cooperative manner (Silva, 2012). Each user generates information and uses it to develop the digital graphics in some way from anywhere around the world. The Web, therefore, becomes participatory and deviates from the previous informative only attitude. The key examples of these programs are blogospheres, wikis and online social networks (Lahti and Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, 2005). Customized Searches The participatory graphic design has been adopted by serious businesses for profit due to the high number of frequent visitors to such sites who can access customized searches of keywords. Today, sites such as Blogger, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and LinkedIn, and Wikipedia have provided massive customized opportunities for business organizations to interact with their consumers and prospects in the social media end-users (Bower, 2010). According to Fang and Strobel (2011) this platform complete with options to input and save new information and the likelihood to obtain and share it with others on the network clearly points to the existence of participation and interactivity eased by a wide range of simplified graphic designs. As Jensen (2012) has indicated, it has become possible to initiate searches for the information that one needs within the technology platform. Poulsen and Thøgersen (2011) noted that with each user having the capacity to create and explain multiple formats of content in real time, it has become tenable to classify information, created or not by teams and thus enhance subsequent access to such information through tags. This way, end-users and or originators of information now have the capacity to create notifications of the information they key in to multiple recipients by syndication. Klein et al (2012) indicate that the significance linked to this programming has been so effective that it has become easier to identify all users and participants who are actively involved in the pursuit of a cause on the Internet and the world in general. This way, participation and communication has stood out as an imperative concept that improves more democratic input of information by anyone, regardless of their location in the world. Critical Analysis Despite its advantages, participatory platforms of graphic designs have been prone to abuse by users who key in misleading information and sharing it with thousands of other users on their social network (Klein et al, 2012). This problem is technically out of control, since censoring information entries is in itself against the very core tenet of the participatory culture and diversity of opinion. Regardless, the approach has triggered more democratic benefits than disadvantages; and, with mere warnings to consumers to be more careful, there has been a sense of responsibility as such technologies increase in the future (Fang and Strobel, 2011). In addition, even though the incorporation of participatory graphic designs in interdisciplinary constructs might seem to be geared towards blurring the boundaries of various disciplines, subject disciplines will remain clearly delineated and more dependent on reality on the ground (Poulsen and Thøgersen, 2011). Conclusion Participatory culture of graphic design allows for better interactions between originators of information and the recipients in a manner that empowers the recipients to take charge of the situation by voicing their individual concerns. The culture provides an appropriate understanding that exists beyond the mere and convenient deployment of digital tools to achieve success. Under the new system, graphic designers pre-empt what the end-users can expect of a technology and create a means of interaction within which they can use the digital environment in a customized way for mutual benefits. Creation of inputs in various digital platforms is the epitome of participation in graphic design that requires only an Internet connection to achieve. References Barnes, A. 2013. Geo/Graphic Design: The Liminal Space of the Page. Geographical Review, 103(2), pp.164-176. Bjögvinsson, E., Ehn, P., and Hillgren, P. 2012. Design Things and Design Thinking: Contemporary Participatory Design Challenges. Design Issues, 28(3), pp.101-116. Bower, L. 2010. Faith-Learning Interaction in Graphic Design Courses in Protestant Evangelical Colleges and Universities. Christian Higher Education, 9(1), pp.5-27. Denning, P.J. 2013. Design Thinking. Communications of the ACM, 56(12), pp.29-31. Dindler, C. 2010. The construction of fictional space in participatory design practice. CoDesign, 6(3), pp.167-182. Fang, J. and Strobel, J. 2011. How ID models help with game-based learning: an examination of the gentry model in a participatory design project. Educational Media International, 48(4), pp.287-306. Jensen, T.E. 2012. Intervention by Invitation: New Concerns and New Versions of the User in STS. Science Studies, 25(1), pp.13-36. Klein et al. 2012. A Design Study of Direct-Touch Interaction for Exploratory 3D Scientific Visualization. Computer Graphics Forum, 31(3), pp.1225-1234. Lahti, H., and Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P. 2005. Towards participatory design in craft and design education. CoDesign, 1(2), pp.103-117. Neuhauser et al. 2009. Participatory Design of Mass Health Communication in Three Languages for seniors and People with Disabilities on Medicaid. American Journal of Public Health, 99(12), pp.2188-2195. Poulsen, S.B., and Thøgersen, U. 2011. Embodied design thinking: a phenomenological perspective. CoDesign, 7(1), pp.29-44. Silva S.M. 2012. The PhOCoe Model - ergonomic pattern mapping in participatory design processes. Work, 41, pp.2643-2650. Umoquit et al. 2008. The efficiency and effectiveness of utilizing diagrams in interviews: an assessment of participatory diagramming and graphic elicitation. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8, pp.1-12. Read More