Be nice. Or else.
Freelance since '08 Joined about 2 years ago
Mike hasn't posted any stories yet.
I was wondering the exact same thing. And not only was there just a few weak questions, the answers were hilariously generic.
Welcome to the internet in 2017 I guess?
Quite frankly, this reads like a load of BS to cover up the fact that they're firing a bunch of people. They've been living high off of 100+ million in VC dough while conveniently ignoring the fact that the content industry is insanely hard to make money in.
Even though Medium wasn't covered in banner ads, it was still just a bunch of people trying to sell you things....themselves. Content marketing and clickbait is not something users will ever pay for. The amount of wannabe thought-leaders writing 3 paragraph "listicles" filled with generic advice and business jargon was growing to near-Linkedin levels.
Ultimately, Medium will fail because good content requires people with valuable insights to spend many hours planning, researching, and crafting that content. Very few people will do that for free.
Does this also mean those clips they've been putting in between TV shows for the last 70 years are just corporate messages meant to sell me things?
I actually recommend designers work for agencies (or start-ups) in their early career and don't move to that cushy big company gig until you've built up some experience in a more fast paced environment.
The fact is, there is no other place where you will get to work on so many varied and different projects, in such a short amount of time than an agency. Now there are good agencies and bad agencies just as there are good companies and bad companies to work for, however on average the agency environment will be much more fast paced. It will be stressful and uncomfortable at times but you will get better, faster. You'll be building things from the ground up and learning what processes work and what doesn't work.
My opinion: Working for a giant, stable company is better in many ways. None of them have to do with your development as a designer. The Money, Stability, and Prestige they add to the resume are the main benefits. However for the most part, you will be doing minor incremental improvements to already successful products and getting better at corporate politics rather than design.
This is perfect for when you're ready to settle down and already have the experience and chops developed from agencies or startups, but if you go to the big company first, I think you're missing something. You'll be trained to meet the end goals of that particular flavor of corporate machine and it'll be very easy to stay employed while doing mostly nothing.
I just got a mental image of a millennial living somewhere in Bushwick (obviously)....hiding behind a couch in a dark room....while the light from their monitor cuts through the darkness...the Vice comment section is up....BOO!
Hilarious. Nothing is more scary than words on the internet. It's not like you can just choose not to read them or not click.
I'm sure they probably realized their readership doesn't want to be confronted with ideas outside the bubble they live in (ie. the "people on facebook" phenomenon), and moderating out thoughts that don't agree with your editorial slant is super expensive in terms of labor cost.
I don't think I've ever read a single article about design that has argued for not putting rational thinking behind a design solution.
Ahhhhh yes. Another "designers don't just make things pretty" article. We already have like 3,000 of these on Medium, do we really need another?
BTW, you have no idea what you are talking about. Dieter Rams was in fact highly concerned with the visual aesthetic (ie. prettiness) of his products.
He obsessively used the principles of symmetry, balance, contrast, repetition and negative space to create objects that fit in within what the modernism movement considered to be beautiful. In no way were any of his product designs strictly functional or utilitarian endeavors. See his "10 principles for good design." Number 3: Good design is aesthetic.
Humans are not efficiency-optimizing robots. We react emotionally to aesthetics. Therefore a designer who ignores aesthetic beauty is not taking a human-centric approach. Period.
I think I'm most appalled by the fact that somebody thought that would be a cool album cover in 2016. That whole faux-80s arcade game type thing peaked back in 2011 with this Justice music video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GiDsLRQg_g4
To the underpaid person who worked on this: weak sauce.