
Originally published on 7/7/14
Do lawyers hate legalzoom? Do doctors hate WebMD? Some cursory anecdotal research would suggest the answers are yes and yes (though deeper analysis reveals that lawyers and doctors really hate their clients and patients, respectively). In both cases, what the professionals seem most upset about is the one-size-fits-all mentality of the two services in question. A medical diagnosis made from ticking off a general list of symptoms omits consideration of a patient’s full history and is likely to be wrong. Likewise, the specifics of an individual’s legal requirements are likely to confound a standard online form and leave the user exposed in some way that he/she can’t predict. Of course, legalzoom and WebMD don’t go out of their way to tell you that.
Enter Canva. As you may already know, Canva is an online “design” (quotes mine) tool that allows users to drag and drop stock images (or your own) into layout templates, tweak a few details and spit out a completed product. It’s easy to use if you really don’t want to change many of the elements from Canva’s pre-fabricated library of templates. And for many people who are either unable or unwilling to pay for professional design services, the results will be good enough.
So one-size-fits-all has arrived for design. It shouldn’t have been hard to see this coming. Fifteen years ago, professional photographers howled about the proliferation of online stock photo agencies, and then again later with the growth of microstock services. They weren’t wrong; though the quality of both stock and microstock has improved greatly in that time, the result has been more homogeneity in photographic solutions, some of which can be unintentionally hilarious.
So it would be churlish of me to attack Canva for bringing that same strategy to design services. Yes, it cheapens the profession and it dumbs down what should be a unique, intellectual process. I guess it’s just our turn.
It’s Canva’s marketing that burns me up. Here’s Canva’s operating premise, in its own words:
“Design shouldn’t be hard but somewhere along the way we became bogged down with expensive, complicated software that put design out of reach for most people. Canva is here to change that, with a tool that makes design simple for everyone.”
Who ever said that design shouldn’t be hard? Why shouldn’t it be hard? Is medicine not hard? Is the law? How about auto repair? Plumbing? Are all specialized services just too darned difficult for the average Joe (who just happens to need that particular service)? Must the Internet offer a lowbrow substitute for everything?
But what really gets me is the reference to “expensive, complicated software” as being key to the problem. Is Adobe’s Creative Cloud software both overpriced and baroque in its features? You bet it is. But so what? It’s a professional product. It’s not intended for the hobby market.
This touches a raw nerve for every designer I know: the belief that equipment equals expertise. I can’t count the number of otherwise reasonable adults I’ve encountered professionally who believe that a copy of InDesign alone qualifies them to compete in the market for design services. An expensive camera does not make you Ansel Adams.
The Internet has been a great force in egalitarianism. But a little meritocracy is not a bad thing. For example, most people believe they have good taste in color. That’s not quite the same as an understanding of color theory and how specific colors can be applied to achieve specific results. People do actually go to school for this stuff.
But then again, every hypochondriac who pesters a physician with a WebMD-inspired malady is still paying for an office visit. So go ahead, world: beat a path to Canva’s door. We’ll be here when you need us. And you will.
Comments