Separating "information design" from "design production"

[Kilometer31]

Trying to focus a bit a thought I'd rambled on about in one of the (many) SND threads.

One of the realities we are facing in the industry is that the "production" act of copy editing and building pages is being either outsourced or consolidated in chain's hubs. I don't agree with it and it's not going to happen everywhere but there is clearly a bean-counter's momentum to this that I doubt is going to be stopped by any arguments we make about story development and so on.

So let's assume that's the way it has to go down, to some degree or other.

Most any designer will agree there are large hunks of the job that are the simple, mechanical processing of pages. Some of these pages could be templated, automated or built by much lower paid beings. It's the other part of real design I want to focus on.

Designers and copy editors (hey, we'd best unite cuz we're in the same leaky boat, kids) tend to be the ones with the expertise to organize information, augment what the reporter and line editor have turned in and turn it into a true informational package. (And it is no different on the web -- except at most newspaper sites there is no one even bothering to mess with that.)

So here's a challenge for SND, VizEds or anyone who gives a hang about what we do professionally:

* How can we and to what degree can we separate the functions of design production from the functions of information development (print or online)?

* In environments where design production is off-sited, how do you staff those information developers, and how do they coordinate with both the content generators and the production people?

* How do we, ourselves, figure out this transition from being a primarily visually focused craft to information specialists? (Yes, there is room for designers to transition to multimedia, video, Flash, mashups and the like. But there is only going to be so much capacity for that an organization is going to be willing to pay for. And more and more, a lot of that stuff is going to become automated in a way that non-specialists can do to a degree that will satisfy the bosses).

* Most importantly: How do you convince newspaper executives to make this transition? How do you explain it, justify it, prove the profit-and-loss still works out?

To me, this is The Big Question.

[Jim McBee]

I don't believe you convince newspaper execs, publishers or editors of anything. I think if you have a better way of doing things, you start your own publication or Web site or what-have-you and prove it in the marketplace. If you're waiting for today's newsroom leaders to get excited about what designers and copy editors can bring to the table, you've already lost the battle.

What you need is not a proposal for the company bigwigs, but a business plan for investors.

The newspaper chain owners have driven the bus into the weeds. I have no faith whatsoever in them.

[Colin Smith]

I'd say phase one is to use communication- and information-centric phrases. For instance, I never talk about what "looks best." Rather, I ask editors what they believe is the most interesting and important information, then suggest tools for getting that information across to readers. I also tend to offer multiple ways of communicating information, that way they feel they've made an informed storytelling decision and not been strong-armed by some designer-type.

The second phase, or at least the one that's worked for me, is working on a variety of in-house products. The ability to visualize multiple products that don't all look like another version of the newspaper, then describe what's being done differently to address a new market, really reinforces your worth not just as a designer but as an information architect and project manager. I try to explain my design choices as they pertain to the goals of the project. It helps, first and foremost, if your higher-ups trust in your abilities as a designer. It also helps if you can explain each and every visual choice -- every element, from typography to spacing to leading to sidebar styles, requires an explanation, but only if they ask (nothing shuts off an editor like a designer who spews visual terminology for what seems like an eternity).

But the real question (Can you create a system at a newspaper that values designers as information architects) is a bit more problematic. I think one or two designers can independently rise to that level, but the number of skills a person needs to occupy this position (the ability to create designs, graphics, Web presentations, print and Web concepts, think both in and outside the box, branding, advertising, back-end systems, and not to mention the logistical nightmare of actually bringing these things to fruition while also doing one's current job) is daunting, to say the least. I don't think an organization needs a department of ten people who can do this, but one or two seems reasonable. And it's up to the individual designer to make the transition happen.

Throughout my career I've created redesign concepts without being prompted -- and always in my free time. If you feel there's a niche not being served by your publication, whip up a prototype and a brief explanation of what it accomplishes. Mention it to your boss in a "I was just playing around with an idea and wanted to get your thoughts ..." sort of way. You don't need to do a mission statement and balance sheet, but you need to be able to answer the big questions: Why do we need this product; How does it differ from the core product; What do you bring to the project; Where will the resources come from; Who supports this idea, etc.

There's probably a better way, but this is how I've transitioned into a quasi-information architect job. Perhaps next year's SND should offer a class on "So, You Want to Be an Information Architect" :)

IMHO, of course.

[Douglas E. Jessmer]

A few quick thoughts:

First, we define design as editing. It's not packaging, nor is it production. The person who puts the package together isn't a packing agent -- he/she is first and foremost an editor.

That requires journalists to sit in those seats. It'll elevate those designers with solid news judgment and writing/editing skills as well as visual chops.

The marketplace will hopefully make the connection the beancounters need, when the prepackaged pages are error-ridden and out of touch with the local market. Readers and advertisers will vote with their feet.