Mar 04 2009
Last month Forbes called professional designers snooty. (If you haven't read the article I'm referring to, go ahead and take a gander; I'll wait.)
Boy did it cause some commotion in the design community. With good reason. The article sure made my blood boil. Call me snooty, but I like to get paid for the time, effort and creativity it takes to create a unique logo or website or whatever for a client, not to mention the education and experience backing it all. I must be crazy.
But I'll stop there. I realize I'm late to the party. So instead of going on about how ridiculous the article is (it is) and how the irony of the statement made me laugh (pot, kettle, anyone?), I've decided to share some links and tidbits from fellow snooty designers that line up with my own thoughts. Enjoy. :)
**Jeff Andrews:**
> The article proves to be poorly researched and irresponsible, and in my opinion serves as little more than an advertisement for Crowdspring.... Keep your fingers crossed that Grandma hasn't swiped that design from the most recent Design Annual, or from Ladies Home Journal for that matter.
**Cat Morley at Designers-Who-Blog.com:**
> Yup, that’s me. I’m one bigheaded la-di-da designer with a hoity-toity arrogance.
**No-Spec.com:**
> Two weeks ago, Christopher Steiner, a senior reporter with Forbes Magazine, sent me an email with FORBES MAGAZINE QUERY!!! in the subject line.
> After a back and forth with Christopher, interviews were set up with top designers in the industry. Busy designers, who agreed to take time out of their workload to talk via phone with Christopher.
>
> The first interviews were missed. The second missed too. With no explanation. No email of apology from Christopher.
**DesignByFirgs.com:** *(A little over the top for me, but still has a couple of good points.)*
> As far as Crowd Spring pitting my degree against a "grandma with Adobe" - this is the most ass-backwards way of thinking that I have ever seen!
**MakeSeriously.com:**
> Forbes, the company who hires designers for both their print and web work, who expects layout designers to be competent; who pays writers based on their work, not on winning some sort of zombie beauty bash; Forbes, who places ads in all of their materials. It strikes me as ridiculous and somewhat hypocritical, and the author comes across as completely ignorant of the case he is pleading for. In what world would 100 people write an article for Forbes.com, and only one get paid for it?
**SwissMiss:**
>This article is ludicrious. I have no words.
**David Airey:**
> I’m all for competition, and indeed welcome it, but when there’s such a one-sided article about the validity of spec work, it’s appropriate to mention the other side of the story.
**Steph Doyle:**
> The article states that the design contest sites have democratized a snooty business and offer low budget solutions. The author goes on to compare an architecture design contest from 1922 to the present day climate of graphic design done on spec. There is just one element missing from Steiner’s article. It’s the voice of the seasoned graphic design professional.
**Erika Akers:**
> Yeah because all companies should hope for the Grandma in Tennessee creating the next ground breaking design. This goes back to the point that just because someone owns design software does not make them a designer.
**Brian Yerkes:**
> Hey, I have a hammer and some wood, anyone need a house built? I have never built a house before but how hard can it be. I’m sure I could put something together that SOMEONE will think looks good. And if they think it looks good, then guess what, I guess I am a builder! Sweet! (just don’t come complaining to me when your house collapses after the first bit of wind.)