this is an excerpt from a conversation between me and the editor of print about rick poynor’s article about the poor quality of design writing online. this is my reply to joyce after she said she felt he was being fair:

i actually don’t think he’s being fair at all. he’s obviously dipping his toes into cronyism in a really transparent, ugly way.

he opens the issue of lack of stewardship in design blogs, and that’s valid. but then he goes straight for speak up as an example of what’s wrong with online design writing – which is invalid, since speak up was design observer’s primary competitor for eyeballs – and therefore his personal competitor.

he also implies acceptance of design observer posts into looking closer 5 as proof of higher quality, which is invalid from any objective viewpoint since design observer was a selector on the project.

i don’t have any issue with print posting the article at all. i actually asked you because i thought you might have some insight not seen online to his motivations. i didn’t mean this as any sort of accusation.

i think it’s about time someone did write the article, because i think design criticism has fallen apart. but it’s too bad someone without bias couldn’t have written it. poynor’s self-interest is so clear it really becomes childish that he did it. in fact, i think that the article may well have forced the situation to devolve even more than it already has.