I sat poised at my desk last Wednesday morning, hunched over Hootsuite, frantically trying to set up columns for #1D4D. I was tweeting on behalf of @theMetaQ, so I had to bring my A-game. This was going to be an exciting day.
Exciting in theory, anyway. This day was April 13, 2011, AIGA’s One Day for Design. One Day for Design was intended to be 24 hours of “an open, global dialogue on the meaning and future of design, and on the meaning and future of professional associations” held on Twitter for the entire world.
This day was inspired by passionate designers and design enthusiasts who wanted to give everyone a voice in helping AIGA explore “ways to better serve the needs of the design community,” and maybe save the world.
However, what should have been an inspiring day, turned out to be a frustrating one. What was meant to be a day of inspiration, turned out to be a bunch of designers spouting cliché quotes and patting themselves on the back. The only way One Day for Design was a dialogue would be if the definition of dialogue were changed to "everyone talking at once and secretly hoping someone would re-tweet them."
I tried to jump into the discussion. I tried to share a few design quotes I liked or ask questions, all of which were instantly swallowed up into the conversation void. I had the very distinct feeling of standing on the outside of the group of popular girls, hoping they’d let me join in the gossip.
I admit there were some interesting quips, a few “aha” moments and a few laughs. Designers are a creative bunch after all. And I could tell that many people were genuinely interested in having an authentic conversation about the future of design. Good intentions or not, One Day for Design seemed more like a contest for who could shout loudest on the floor of the New York stock exchange.
I felt as though my tweets were a drop in a massive ocean of irrelevance. In order to process the information overload, I began collecting tweets that I liked, saving them before they sank under the massive shipwreck that was the dialogue, saving them from being lost forever in a sea of characters.
In the end, there were more than 30,000 tweets and around 3,900 Twitterers. At one point, the hashtag #1D4D was trending at no. 4 in the United States. Very impressive.
But would I call One Day for Design a success? Maybe. Did I learn anything? Sorta. Would I do it again? Probably. Did it achieve anything? Not really.
I think the entire problem with One Day for Design can best be summed up by @timothywhalin: "Design can’t be described in 140 characters."
Pattern Source: LoveMissB
What others are saying
Mike Mai
True dat. It was a UX fail.
CoachMhairi
I’ve heard many people say it was cacophonous and no-one was listening.
I say, you get out what you put in. I had some great conversations and connected with many designers.
It was really useful for gaining a snapshot of where Twitter-member-designers are at.
Timothy Whalin
Hey Lindsay,
Thanks for this wonderful article and what a surprise to see you quoting me! Nice to meet you, by the way. It was a very hectic day, though I did get to meet a lot of nice tweeters. Wish there was a better way to make design connections on twitter.
Ken Peters
Hi Lindsay,
I also participated in 1D4D, and was unsure about the final result. In the end, I had some very worthwhile interactions with folks, and enjoyed seeing many of the comments. I don’t think anything bad ever comes out of sharing points of view.
By its very nature, Twitter provides a venue for spewing cliche quotes and fortune cookie wisdom. That is to say, a venue for trying to be profound, pithy, or prophetic in a very limited space (140 characters). That’s not such a bad thing, though. “Everyone talking at once and secretly hoping someone would re-tweet them.” is what’s at the core of Twitter, whether the discussion is design, or politics. Let’s face it, in “real” conversation you probably want most people to shut up by the time they get to 140 characters. But, I digress.
I disagree with the statement that design cannot be described in 140 characters. It can, and it can be described 100 different ways, in 100 different tweets, by 100 different people. To paraphrase Einstein, “If you can’t explain it to a six year old, you don’t understand it yourself.” Parsing something down to 140 characters forces you to understand it, and communicate it in a very clear way, whatever “it” may be. Twitter forces you to communicate more with less, and after all, isn’t that what’s at the heart of design?
For me, the value of the cursory conversations on Twitter is what I can take from them and add to the more meaningful conversations that I have off of Twitter. I think there was a lot to take from 1D4D.
Cheers.
Maria Black
I agree with you. It was very chaotic. By the time I could reply to people in certain discussion, the feed would be so far ahead of me, it was ridiculous. I had intended to go back and review later that night, but I forgot. I just found a few more design greats to follow really.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. #1D4D out.
domore
Thank you so much. I learn a lot to know, how to improving our skills and become success, thanks again.
montreal escort agency