Summer-Break Update
Over the past several months I took some time to look into other areas of interaction design. Initially I wanted to research interface design for older adults, but I kept finding existing studies, bachelor’s and master’s theses that already covered the topic. It didn’t feel innovative. Since then I’ve shifted to the topic of deceptive patterns as it is currently in public discourse. (e.g. Engagement-Optimized Algorithms)
Recently, more related topics like solarpunk, capitalism, social media and as already mentioned deceptive patterns came to my attention. Social media platforms monetize on attention, which ties their revenue directly to how long users stay engaged. This incentivises comapnies to create addictive algorithms and to use deceptive patterns.
In this context, I found the book Desing after Capitalsim by Matthew Wizinsky which I am currently reading. The author argues that design needs to be reoriented away from exploitative and growth driven models towards much fairer and more sustainable ones.
For my first blog post I watched a lecture about this topic from the author.
This lecture was focused on Design design after Capitalism. Matthew Wizinsky was talking about difference of Design (with capital d or expert design) and design (lowercase d or diffuse design). He describes Design as the the design being practised by trained designers whereas design is performed by everybody. Most importantly he mentioned that expert design can help facilitate diffuse design.
Facing the Polycrisis
The speaker mentioned that humanity are currently facing a poly-crisis: ecological, economic and social crises. They are not separate problems but overlap and reinforce each another. He asked himself if design can help us imagine a life after capitalism.
How can we begin to think beyond capitalist logics and subjectivities, so that we can start to labor, work, act and live in different ways?
This question resonated with me because I have noticed in my own work that much of what I design is driven by business interests and not the users. Companies decide goals and metrics, so in the end our design decisions end up following their commercial interests.
Who owns attention?
Most interestingly humanity currently lives in a time where information is everywhere and its valuable because attention, data and knowledge are parts that drive economy as well. As Matthew Wizinsky pointed out, property and ownership have shifted. In the past, owning something meant owning a physical product, but today things are digital. This is also where big platforms come in. They are not just passive participants in the market, they are the market itself. They decide what users see, what creators earn and what advertisers pay. And Designers sit at the center of this system: they create the interfaces, brands and experiences of these platforms and are therefore directly responsible for decisions that affect millions of users and huge amounts of revenue.
Why it is related to my topic of deceptive patterns?
Looking back at everything, deceptive patterns are not accidents.They come from companies and their business models, where engagement equals revenue and Designers are the ones who create the tools that make this possible. For this reason and for many others this topic is important to me.
Right now I am trying to gather ideas and impulses from this talk.
Disclaimer: I will use the terms “Designers” and “designers” with their distinct meanings, that were mentioned by Matthew Wizinsky.
