I love Good magazine more than anything, truly, and I appreciate the proactive involvement in helping make sense of tragedies in places like Haiti, so we can better tend to the future. They are at the forefront of design for social awareness. Sometimes though, I just can’t help but read these articles objectively and have it strike the wrong emotional note…

“Haiti Earthquake Infographic Winner Announced; Emily['s graphic] clearly and concisely depicts both the human toll of the earthquake and the scope of the earthquake itself… [She] will take home our prize package, including a GOOD T-shirt and a free subscription.”

Does this not seem disreputable that you receive a t-shirt for accurately depicting the devastation of other human beings? I mean really. 2 million need food. Over 1 million are homeless. I realize this agenda was likely not the intent of the designer, and I admit I wish I was able to contribute such a concise and helpful infographic to the world, but I’ve recently read far too many articles that glamorize the process;
A photographer with a heart-wrenching Haiti slideshow, commenting,

“I shot the aftermath in my spare time… [and] as demanding as it was, it taught me how to pick shots on the fly, and in ‘not so perfect’ lighting or shooting conditions.”

My biggest hope for the future of socially aware design is not that we stop doing it, but that we remain acquainted with how we are viewing and treating these intensely sensitive, disturbing scenarios. These are the times in which we can actually be able to support a worthy initiative… Just as long as we can keep our egos out of it.