Design by Bureaucracy

As a person with a strong Libertarian inclination, I found myself recently considering the impact of Government interference in my own industry of work. Perhaps despite my better judgement, I'm going to have a crack at a socio-political discussion about Design - could anything be more cringe-worthy?

What set me on this particular train of thought was a talk-back discussion regarding a cigarette company that was seeking compensation from the Australian Government for the claim that the mandatory on-pack health warnings had affected their branding and subsequent sales. There are understandable intentions on both sides of this story, but like many similar stories that have circulated over recent years, I am convinced that the Government is in the wrong.

As introduced, I have a strong Libertarian inclination, that is, my opinion is that the role of Governments in society should be strictly limited from infringing on individual freedom. They of course have a role to play in law, justice, defence, diplomacy, health, infrastructure and education and resultantly their influences do bleed into people's lives through such provisions. However, it seems that Governments can easily over-step their bounds when they begin to interfere in people's choices.

Now, before this becomes an unwieldily broad topic, I am going to bring this back to the cigarette packaging. The intention of the Government with mandatory health warnings is to advise consumers of the known health risks of smoking and as noble as it may be, it's my opinion that the Government has not only infringed on the cigarette branding but also the work of Designers. And now busy-body bureaucrats are moving forward with laws dictating that cigarettes should only be sold in plain packaging, akin to less than a 'No Frills' branding. In effect, this would decimate any local Design studio that serviced the tobacco industry. That this was even proposed raises serious concerns about the arbitrary way the Government can affect the work of Designers. 

I know nothing about Design for tobacco so any further comment would clearly be speculation, but I would like to take these concerns and transplant them to an area of Design more familiar to me. In my own niche of the Entertainment Industry, there has been considerable Government interference which has directly affected the practice of Graphic Design. The greatest area of Government influence has been in their policies on the ratings classification of films. In around 2005 the OFLC revamped the classification system, not in any substantial way, but in a rather garish 'rebranding' - it is the same letter-based rating system, with the same points of consumer advice. Unlike the old ratings however, the new ratings device makes no concessions to integrate into the artwork it accompanies. Sitting there, in it's intrusive bureaucratic fashion, the large white device ensures that the Government's rating is the primary feature of the artwork. 

My Libertarian sympathies are greatly offended by the fact that my profession - to make the most effective artwork for DVD packaging - is impinged by the Government deciding that consumers in a free market need to be overtly educated on what content is appropriate based on whatever arbitrary age/maturity group they want to divide us into.

My Design sensibilities are also offended, mainly by the visual ugliness of this Government intrusion. Perhaps it's a lack of budget to alter the artwork, or perhaps truly no one gives a shit, but the horrible ratings device is usually slapped on in it's mandated position - like the intrusive bureaucratic fingerprint it is - with no thought to the composition of the keyart or what might be covered.

What's worse is the notion put forward that R18 rated films should be only displayed in plain packaging, not unlike with the cigarettes that got me started on this topic. No! No! No! No!!!

DVDs from the US are classified in their own system, however it is displayed on the back of the sleeve, given equal weighting to the rest of the important information about the content of the disc (running time, audio formats, aspect ratio). This is how Australia should label it's film classification, the Government does not need to step in for the Entertainment Industry to ensure films are skewed to the correct audiences, there are people employed by the film companies to do that very thing - it's called marketing. 

As a Designer my function is essentially as a branch of marketing; to visually convey a film in a way that corresponds with the desired direction chosen by the marketers. There are subtle ways in which tone, colour and composition can inform a consumer if a film is right for them, ways which are much more effective than a colour-coded categorization. The Government should not be in the business of marketing because, unimpinged, we professionals will do it better every time.