[Sigia-l] NextD takes a slash at "Findability, InformationArchitecture"

[Christopher Fahey]

Lee Hsieh wrote:
> Let's just say i've watched the industry grow since '94, as 
> have many others, so i'm not pulling this out of thin air. 
> Not once have i come across an informed, gracious reply to IA 
> criticism by the highly vocal proponents of IA.  If anything, 
> responses to criticism have always been tainted with some 
> form of   derision, condescension and hostility. 

In this particular instance, GK VanPatter's petty and seething criticisms
deserve every bit of derision and condescension we can reflect back at him
and his "Institute". His accusation that the IA community is wholly ignorant
and unaware of Richard Saul Wurman is ludicrous (nobody I know is unaware of
Wurman) and merely belies his own ignorance of who we are and what we know. 

As far as critiquing the IA community for living in an ivory tower and being
not open to critique, well, I think Lee is projecting his own opinions into
VanPatter's essay. I didn't see that particular critique in the story
myself. And I second Christina's view that, in fact, the opposite is true:
this is the most hand-wringing, existentially-questioning community I know
of, constantly wondering how we fit in and how we can learn from other
communities. 

VanPatter's critique that the IA community is hostile to design, IMHO, has a
grain of truth but ultimately he's barking up the wrong tree: Firstly, the
most vocal members of the community he targets are the least hostile of all
to the value of design and aesthetics -- it's largely the HCI/usability
aspect of the IA community (JJG's lab coats) that, IMHO, has some design
hostility, and should the IA community be faulted for embracing multiple
perspectives in that regard? Secondly, one of the defining characteristics
of this community is our struggle to maintain an healthy and respectful
orbit around design without getting pulled in too close. Many of us created
our careers as part of a design team or a design-focused business. Design is
always on our minds (although I'd agree that it could and should be a closer
orbit).

My take is that VanPatter's just out of touch with this community and that
he felt a little pissed off after reading Peter Morville's essay, because
he's been using the term Information Architecture for twenty years and
doesn't like the way we use the term these days. PDF publishing is just dumb
and annoying, and Lee's defense that it prevents copying-and-pasting not
only is factually wrong, as David Malouf has mentioned, but it flies in the
face of everything that is good and progressive about having truly open
conversations and freedom of thought on the web. VanPatter is just throwing
moltov cocktails at strawmen that don't exist, otherwise he ought to name
names and provide links (he doesn't cite any examples, and the only person
he actually names is the wrong guy: he points his finger at Peter Merholz
when he clearly is thinking of Peter Morville).

-Cf

Christopher Fahey
____________________________
Behavior
biz: http://www.behaviordesign.com
me: http://www.graphpaper.com