A note to designers that they should pay close attention to the ethical practices of their clients. As designers we are vested with the powerful tool of Visual Communication. A tool much more powerful today in the 21st century than ever before.
You see, if a company you design for is knowing harming or allowing harm to come to other human beings in order to get its product made, it's not just them that takes the fall if they ever get found out but also the designer. Why? Because it's our job to know as much about our clients as possible. That's how we make great design for them.
Is it fair to say that designers always know about the unethical practices of their clients? No. But it should be the first thing people find out about their client: their ethics, how they treat other human beings. Because by designing products made in sweatshops, you're only perpetuating a slave trade. And if you haven't thought about the ethical and moral position of your clients before you even put pen to paper, one can only safely deduce that you simply don't care. And you should be cast out of the Design world and held as accountable as the people who do the harm.
`ChewedKandi has certainly gone out of her way to keep the vector community on the right path. Always making sure that her talents are infinitely scalable, Sharon has put her bezier curves to excellent use, and firmly anchored herself as an inspirational leader. We're absolutely delighted to bestow the Deviousness Award for June 2013 to `ChewedKandi. Congratulations, Sharon! Read More
Sta.sh
Great work though and keep it up, the most important thing is to get people to, at the very least, think about what they do, even if they change nothing their conscious will always be aware.
Even companies that operate with a strict code of corporate social responsibility (CSR) may still in fact be supporting unethical treatment. Ie: Company A makes a product, but a component or raw material for that product may come from company B. If your train of thought is to be followed, it would stem to reason that company A is just as guilty as company B. Therefore, a designer for company A, is as guilty as company B.
With most modern products comprising of many ingredients/other products, to take a single product to retail, it could be composed of the products of 10+ other companies, each of which made their product from 10+ other companies.
I also disagree that doing a design for a company that harms humans makes you, the designer, look bad. Take in mind Frank Robinson who designed the coca cola logo. A design that is going strong all these years, and Frank himself is immortalised. Yet who designed the Greenpeace logo? (quick google search turned up nothing).
Although I agree with your general sentiment of the need to promote companies that have clear CSR guidelines, I believe no one is able to deliver any product to market without harming someone, somewhere. So although doing a design for a guerrila group probably isn't the best idea, doing a logo for a MNC who indirectly funds (or directly funds) such a group would not pose a problem.
I mean, take anyone who designed for Adidas. A company that went
out of its way to boycott an EU meeting to discuss the fair treatment
of workers in eastern Europe (ie, working toward the abolishment of
sweatshops in favour of Union Shops). It was very public affair at the time
the designers must have seen it. So if they continue to design for Adidas
then one can conclude that they're a fuckhead who doesn't care
about the lives of other humans. Same for Big Spaceship who design for
Coca-Cola. Coca-Cola's opinions on the way their columbian subcontractors
have a knack for shooting Trade Unionists in their factories are horrific the
'we don't own or operate the factories' (IE: turning a blind eye). It was also
public knowledge when the lawsuit was filed against Coca-Cola.
But Big Spaceship continue to design for them. Why? Because they don't
care. They're in it for the money, not the love of design.