I have a bit of a problem with graphic designers in media fields. Seems to me they are more interested in how things look than in how they work, i.e., in whether their design supports the transfer of information -- the purpose of media communication. If the mediaworker's meaning isn't quickly and easily moved to the reader/viewer, then no matter how pretty something is, it is unacceptable.
And don't even bring up such things as accuracy and proper spelling, grammar and punctuation. Graphic designers look at words and see a typeface and kerning, not meaning transfer tools.
This is my problem with a lot of advertising design contests. Awards sometimes go to "pretty ads" that didn't work for the company. Heck, if an ad didn't move people to action, then it simply wasn't a good ad.
I have been all for information design for a long time, an approach that puts the transfer of meaning first. More from me later, but check out http://www.informationdesign.org. Cheers.
