First Things First Manifesto - Ken Garland, Adbusters, and Rick Poynor

 

Reasoning

It'd been a while since I'd looked at the First Things First Manifesto, so I printed out copies of the 1964 and 2000 Manifestos to make notes on, as well as an article supporting it by Rick Poynor, a signatory of the 2000 Manifesto. 

What I Gained

I'd written down noted down presumptions about the Manifesto that I'd remembered thinking from last time I read it, and was looking for quotes that backed them up. I started with the 2000 manifesto because I remember it being a bit more negative than the original. I found that all the points I made in my notes were backed up by particular parts of the 2000 manifesto, and so in the 1964 one I looked for bits that were missing in the updated one to identify which of Garland's thoughts Adbusters deemed to be unnecessary, and then looked for explanations in Poynor's article. This is what I found: 

1. 1964's Manifesto explicitly states that they don't want to get rid of consumerism, and tends to have a more positive attitude in general.
2. 2000's Manifesto is very accusational of designers, blaming them for the growth of consumerist culture.
3. 2000's Manifesto is a lot more politically based than 1964's.
4. The 1964 Manifesto wasn't pre-planned and was a "heat of the moment" thing.
5. Ken Garland was an active member of the Labour Party at the time of the 1964 Manifesto's publishing, and it gained the attention of Labour MP Tony Benn.

Potentially useful quotes:

Next Steps

Poynor was supportive of FTF, as would be expected from a signatory, so I now want to look for a fairly high-profile person who's critical of the manifesto to balance this out a bit, Michael Bierut seems like a good place to start. I also want to look into Johanna Drucker, the aritst/critic mentioned by Poynor who suggested that "the life and consciousness of the designer" are at stake by not following FTF.