The energy crisis in South Africa that we find ourselves in the middle of at the moment has taken centre stage and is a staple of polite conversation. It is this current event(ness) that is probably the reasoning behind giving us the brief we were given.
The task at hand was to use creating a communication or group thereof that will make a positive change in relation to the publics experience of the energy crisis. Sometimes you can drown when the brief is as open as this, or go overly excessive on the "wrong" tangent.
At the beginning I was exited about the brief, and then this excitement lagged. Eventually once I found my solution and concluded that the impact of my communication didn't have to change the world, but it would be nice if it did so.
I was encouraged to evaluate my role as a visual communicator. "Should I use my power for good?", as it were. Or can I at least? The context in which I am working offers vast numbers of communication opportunities and I am encouraged not to be bound by these, to break new ground and even discover new ways to communicate. This is granted to the exceptional young prodigies in my experience and so far that hat doesn't fit me. On reflection of my audience, and remembering that I am part of a tiny tiny target market at which hardly anything is actually targeted, I tossed my worries aside and realized that people like pretty things. This is made apparent to me when I see how everyday people constantly remind me of these pretty things on hearing what I study. In my capacity as a student I am still more than capable of creating change and fulfilling the brief. The next concern is that the design is responsible in accomplishing this change, and this must always be on my mind when I am executing my work and through the process as well so I don't end up executing an idea which has a negative impact. This can often happen subconsciously or without one being aware of it happening.
After the research process I was most intrigued most by two ideas.
The first is the concept of the "izinyoka", this comes from an advertising campaign by Eskom in which people who illegally stole electricity were called izinyoka or a evil person. These izinyoka were blamed for killing innocent people when people touched exposed wires. The death of children was presented as the reason behind the ads but we all know it was because Eskom was losing money because of these izinyoka. They even looked evil in the adverts and had glowing eyes and scales. I read an account in which a woman stole electricity in order to provide for her family and pay her kids' school fees. I had planned to execute some kind of "How to Steal Electricity" website or guide which would show someone ow to do this safely. I soon realized this was not socially responsible and would not help the situation the way I hoped it would. I had the thought that it would force Eskom into some type of action like increasing the availability of electricity. If said idea had been executed and implemented I fear it would actually fuel the fire that is the energy crisis, and generate unnecessary sympathy for Eskom.
The second area I focused on was alternative forms of renewable energy, and the current methods of electricity generation impact on the environment. I was particularly interested in the role individuals could play in generating electricity for their own household. I wanted people to know about what they could actually do themselves, which were a little bigger steps than using energy saving light bulbs, because I feel as do many others that much more is needed. In showing people what they can do to live independently from form Eskom, wholly or partially at least. In doing so individuals acting on the communication would also be helping the environment. I thought that using the load shedding as an irritation which might be the spark that would start people on the path to living greener.
The message I hoped to communicate to the audience is they can live "off the grid", generate their own electricity without eskom . I hoped to do this by showing them the various ways that the could do this, give them example of technologies they could apply to their own homes. A secondary message would be an environmental danger alert type message. This is not the primary message because Eskom has provided me with what I needed to convince people that they can make their own electricity. this is what I am going for. THe fact that doing so would benefit the environment is completely secondary.
For my communication I set a realistic objective. I hoped it would set into motion the process of changing there lifestyles and the way they live. Although I know what I am asking the audience to do is a drastic thing, but again it is what is necessary. Anyway people say they want to know what they can do as individuals with regard the way they live. I hope to inform them. I planned to do a flash website which could double as something could be emailed from interested parties to people they thought would be interested. So when deciding to define a target market I had to consider that people who would have a computer and the internet. On the whole this group would fall into slightly higher LSM groupings and would have a higher income. And in order to implement the changes suggested by the communication they would have to be from some of the higher LSM and income groupings. If demand for the products suggested increases I am sure that the prices will decrease as new competitors into the respective industries arrive. The average person in my target market would not be aware that they can live without Eskom and can actually generate their own electricity with their surroundings and things that are currently being wasted at the moment. I would hope that my website would be seen by potential new homeowners or people who are considering building their own houses so that the transformation wouldn't be a transformation at all.
I adopted a subtle and humorous tone in the communication, I chose to do this because I feel that this whole fiasco is quite funny, although to some people it might not be. This is why I did not make it overly funny; some people take this energy crisis to heart. Also if it were like a joke people wouldn’t take it seriously. This is why I countered the slightly humorous copy and odd joke with slick and more serious design.
I settled on the concept of "the Greenhouse", because it summed up all I wanted to communicate and allowed me to illustrate the applications of various household renewable forms of energy. This greenhouse is a "tree house" which is executed in the form of a flash website, which can be downloaded and used as an emailer (the point of this is to encourage a viral spin-off). The viewer will be able to explore the greenhouse on a 2D level and find out more about the various forms of self generated electricity. They will see how they work and the negative and positive attributes of the respective technologies. They will also be able to access links to other websites where they can begin the process of getting the various energy forms installed in their homes.
To advertise the website I will comment on related blogs and attach a link to my website. Once my website is functioning on the web I will email its link to websites like energycrisis.co.za and other similar sites, hopefully they will post my link on their own site.
For the design I chose something quite clean but bright at the same time. I used mainly green and black as the base colours in the site. Black gives the feeling of darkness and night, which is relevant because of our electricity woes. The green is related with the concept of the greenhouse and nature.
