Helvetica: The Eternal Font

Until seeing the film Helvetica, I was completely unaware as to just how frequently the font is used. I must say though, it is a pretty perfect typeface and it makes sense that it can be used in every imaginable form.  It's a bit extraordinary, and the universality it allows in being used on everything from garbage trucks to high end brand logos displays this to the nth degree.

Although the film was split into two sides - the side for simplicity which advocated using clean, legible fonts for all purposes and the side for elaborate fonts that allow text to be used in an expressive manner - I didn't really see there being a case one being right and the other, wrong. 

Personally, I find expressive forms of text interesting and quirky and I thoroughly enjoy them. They add a little extra oomph to a statement or help to display an emotion in a more visual, rather than linguistic, manner. 

Like this movie poster for example: The image of the old man himself would probably make you think the film is just an animated movie about old people. But the text (and, okay fine, maybe the Disney Pixar logo at the top :) ) lets you know the movie should be fun-filled and highly amusing because of the way it is positioned as well as the bloatedness of it that could remind you of a balloon.

But to contrast that, this movie poster has very simple text (I'm no expert but I'm pretty sure the font is Helvetica) and the image is what does the majority of the talking. The bleakness of the sky and the rundown quality of the van, the man alone at the centre of the poster, all these speak of loneliness or isolation. The text isn't colourful or warped or expressive in any way and that adds to the feeling the poster may evoke.

So, yes expressive use of text is great in that it adds a special element to whatever message you may be trying to portray (either visually or linguistically), but simplicity in text can be equally important when getting a message across. At the end of the day, I don't think it's a matter of simple versus elaborate but more a matter of using fonts consciously to express your message in the best way possible.

Hair-raising URLs

Whenever it comes close to Halloween, I know it's that time of year to actively start screening any web content that's sent my way. On one too many an occasion a friend or family member, thinking they're being utterly amusing, will send me a link to a website where they guarantee you'll see something amazing. As long as you turn the volume up on your computer, you'll get the full experience.

So, you click on the link and you watch the screen with what looks like closed-circuit video footage of an empty room for a good 10 seconds. And then, just as you're about to turn away, a horrible face will pop up on the screen and screech at you like an banshee. It's enough to give a healthy person a heart attack.

And so, I no longer open sketchy emails with vague promises of "instant gratification" as long as I follow the instructions.

So, naturally, when my cousin sent me this link, I immediately discounted it and absolutely refused to open it. I told her as much as well. But my cousin is a stubborn woman, bless her.
She proceeded into coaxing me to opening the link, telling me she hated those kinds of emails too and that she would never, ever send something like that to anyone.

Well, needless to say, I'm not quite as stubborn as she is, and perhaps not as cynical as I thought I was, so I opened the link.

I'll let you see it for yourself, so I'll refrain from giving you a breakdown of what will show up on your screen. All I will say is this: It's frightening, yes, but not in the something-popping-out-at-you-and-causing-you-to-pee-yourself-a-little way. You don't have to turn your speakers to full blast to appreciate what you'll see (and I really do hope you will appreciate it!)

And, as a disclaimer, I'll say if you're deathly afraid of heights don't say I didn't warn you!

Web Browser Conundrum

Remember Netscape? That was the first web browser I ever used on the clunky family computer we had in our living room, next to the TV. We had dial-up Internet back then, when getting on the Internet meant you had to listen to this strange beeping, buzzing and ringing noise while clinging to the edge of the computer desk hoping that no one would call the house and the damn thing would eventually connect.

Not too long after that my dad introduced our family to Microsoft. My memories of this period are vague since back then it was cooler to be out playing street hockey and hanging out with the neighborhood kids than to be sitting in front of a computer screen. But somehow, Internet Explorer became a staple in my life. School, work, home. It was all about IE.

It was only when I got my MacBook Pro that I was truly converted to something other than Internet Explorer. Sure, I had used Firefox, Opera, Chrome and Safari now and then. My cousin even installed Firefox on my laptop. But Internet Explorer was what I knew and I always reverted back to it even though it always crashed and I hated it.

I use Safari all day, everyday now. I can't say there are any real, fundamental problems with it, as far as I can see. Sure, you get the odd pop-ups and sometimes it'll crash. Actually, it crashes at least once a week, but it's comfortable, easy to use and pre-installed on my Mac. So, hey, why not use it? I'm not a huge techie so I won't go out of my way to find a newer, better, more efficient browser. Safari gets the job done more often than not so I'm happy with it!

Embracing Change - Research Methods Blog 1

As web technologies progress and as we, as a society, delve deeper into the possibilities presented by digital communication, it is by default that concerns regarding personal privacy and disclosure become more and more urgent.

Delete: The Virtue of Forgetting in a Digital Age, a book by Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, addresses these issues in an interesting way. According to Mayer-Schönberger, whereas in the past it was more costly to remember things (such as spending money on paper and ink or painstakingly documenting things over a number of years) it has now become such that forgetting is “brutally expensive”. Keeping records has become so easy and virtually automatic for most that it is only due to costly technological problems that we don’t record things; for example, trying to retrieve documents from a broken hard drive or pictures from a damaged digital camera.

Mayer-Schönberger believes whereas forgetting came easily in the past, society has now “begun to unlearn forgetting” to the point where we are trying to remember everything and Mayer-Schönberger believes this is causing huge problems regarding personal privacy in the world.

However, according to Adam Keiper (editor of The New Atlantis), the examples Mayer-Schonberger uses in his books to further his point do not soundly support his argument.

One example Mayer-Schönberger uses is of a psychotherapist who has been denied entry into the U.S. since 2006 because of an explicit personal account of his use of drugs in the 1960s. According to Keiper this does not support Mayer-Schonberger’s argument that digital memory and the need to remember everything is detrimental to society. Keiper says the situation with the psychotherapist was the psychotherapists own nostalgia that led to his being denied entry into the U.S. If he hadn’t been so public about his drug-use he wouldn’t have had a problem with U.S. border security.

In a second example, a teacher-in-training is denied certification because of a suggestive photo on her MySpace page. Keiper says that the woman was not denied certification because of one photo that suggested she was drunk, but rather that there were “several problems that called into question her competence and performance”. Keiper also argues that this is not a case of “remembering too well” but a case of the blurring of lines between public and private lives in the online world.

Toby Shuster from takepart.com agrees to some degree with Keiper saying digital memory is not to blame for the unforgiving lack of forgetfulness in society. Shuster believes it is a case of people lacking the proper online etiquette when it comes to making use of privacy settings and practicing self-censorship.

Shuster says Mayer-Schönberger’s argument is more of a case of “a Harvard academic, shaking his fist in a ‘kids these days, with their digital cameras and unlimited storage!’ fashion.”

I tend to agree with Shuster. Although I understand the extreme concerns lack of privacy in the online realm presents, I believe Mayer-Schönberger’s method of addressing the problem is no more than the fear-mongering tactics of a man who is afraid of change.

Society, for as long as it has existed, has had times of ups and downs where there have been individuals scoffing at progression and radical changes, claiming that they will cause the downfall of society as we know it; and this is what, in my humble opinion, Mayer-Schönberger is doing.

Yes, a man being denied entry into the U.S. because of drug usage 40 years previously is an unfortunate thing. Yes, missing out on a job opportunity because of something you posted on Facebook or Twitter or MySpace on whim, but that does not speak to your character as a person or employee, is ridiculous. But this is not a problem created by the Digital Age and the causal outcome of everything being recorded and retained on the Internet. This is ultimately a human problem. Having access to archival information, employers, governments, organizations and people in general are using this information in a way that, to me, is the cause of the problem. They are abusing the freedom achieved by having access this kind of information and using it against others without compassionate regard for the individuals in question. They are judging too harshly because of one image or one sentence or one recollection from decades ago. And this is where I believe the problem lies.

If we are to embrace the change our society is undergoing, if we are to adapt in a way that avoids crisis and fear-mongering, we must, as a society, be more respectful of the freedoms we have gained and as a result have a little more humility, tolerance and good judgment when we access this information. As the age-old saying goes: “Don’t judge a book by it’s cover.” Unfortunately, this is exactly what we are doing by taking things on social networking sites at face value. It must stop, one way or another in order for this change to be one that allows our society to progress and eventually thrive online.

If anyone has any specific suggestions on how to achieve this, I would like to hear your opinion… leave a comment!