Planned obsolescence had almost started sounding like a conspiracy theory – a catch-all term for the nefarious schemes of the big bad industrialists out there, used by exasperated consumers when a product unexpectedly stopped being of use.
But it may not all be in our head, as a piece by Izzie Ramirez for Vox suggests. Ramirez writes: “people are conditioned to buy the new thing and to keep replacing it. Companies, in turn, amp up production accordingly. It’s less so that objects are intended to break — functional planned obsolescence, if you will — but rather that consumer mindsets are oriented around finding the better object. But “better” doesn’t always mean long-lasting when companies are incentivized to produce faster and faster and faster.”
Further complicating the problem:
“Social media helps accelerate the trend cycle even further. Consumers are buying five times more clothing than they did back in the 1980s. In order to produce goods that fast, both the quality of the item and the quality of life for workers have to take a hit. This is happening alongside a decrease of prices for the consumer (not rooted in reality!) to encourage more trend-oriented shopping and haul buying.”
While Ramirez brings up a lot of issues related to the problem (such as companies like Apple opposing the right to repair), the her argument seems to be focussed on design thinking in contemporary culture:
“Design has shifted more toward manufacturability and appearance than functionality, when it should be a balance of all three. Arguably, it’s nearly impossible for corporations to avoid participating in the trend cycle as long as consumers have an appetite for more — whether it’s a predilection for cooler clothing or whatever new incremental yet buzzy technology just came out. At the same time, the blame does not lie on consumers’ shoulders; corporations are responsible for creating and stoking the “new and more is better” culture we have today.”
Read the full article here.
Reblogger 