The main question I have after reading this is: what 'bargain' is the author referring to? Apps change their logos all of the time, as is their right. The timing of this post is coincident with pride month, and many companies changing altering their logo to use the pride colors. I disagree with the suggestion that changing the color(s) of the logos and icons hinder the user's ability to find the app. A rainbow version of Dropbox's icon isn't going to make it any harder for me to find the Dropbox app and it might just make under-represented groups feel more seen.
I think the more general topic of brands taking political stances is worthy of debate, for sure. I tend to think it's fine. If I agree, great. If I don't, then I can choose spend my money at a company whose values align better with mine.
When someone complains about politics infiltrating a space but is unwilling to name the specific politics, suggesting it's a general principle, they very likely have a problem with the specific politics. They see social costs in voicing that opinion, so they generalize it to some principle.
Hard to imagine a minor annoyance of logo design would otherwise justify a public post. Living in a pluralistic, multi-cultural society doesn't mean excluding politics from the public sphere. It means tolerating politics in the public sphere, especially if you're ambivalent or even a little annoyed by those politics.
In this example, if it's pride symbols or the Ukrainian flag, or something else -- those will stop being political once the rights are so normalized and obvious, they no longer elicit reactions like this.
> I disagree with the suggestion that changing the color(s) of the logos and icons hinder the user's ability to find the app.
I actually disagree. There are lots of inputs my brain is using other than the specific logo when I'm quickly moving through my phone looking for a specific app, and this could totally throw me off. Often times I think to save energy my brain looks for a "low-rez" abstraction of what I'm looking for rather than one that is in full detail. That being said, with everyone requiring an app these days my phone is so overloaded I just search for everything.
Granted, I don't thing the original posters concerns have as much to do with accessibility, and if it takes me a little longer to find an app, so be it.
I have been part of a dance/art community in a past life. There's a prevailing belief that "the personal is political"[0], which basically manifests as all things (art/products/etc) being unambiguously imbued with your politics, because politics doesn't end at the public sphere.
This idea became mainstream at some point, and the result is that we must now signal what team we're on in everything we create. Abstaining from this signaling just means you're either ignorant of the causes (best assumption) or you're on the other team (worst assumption).
Politicizing the person is something that happens to some people against their will.
For example people don’t choose to be gay, it just happens like being tall or having blue eyes. But in Florida there is a law now saying teachers can’t talk about gay people in school. Totally still fine to talk about tall people, though.
This is why “Pride Month” is a big deal but tall people month is not. Gay people didn’t choose to become “political.” But since they are subjected to that scrutiny, they of course want to stand up for themselves, and other people who value equality under the law want to stand up with them.
"You know, it would be nice if I could get something from the store that didn't have ' WORKERS OF THE WORLD, UNITE ! ' engraved on it in huge lettering."
"Wow, you must think working people don't have a right to exist"
"I bet you support serfdom and slavery"
"How could you say such a thing on May Day?"
Apart from the points that the author makes I dislike the disproportionate political activisim because it's just plain cringe and arrogant.
When it comes from a multi billion dollar giant it's still annoying but more understandable that a giant organisation with thousands of people will have a lot going in it.
But when a dude behind a $2.95 "NFT chat bot for your grandma's crypto portfolio" app wants to do it, it's something else.
They need to find another avenue to express their political ideas rather than letting it bleed into an unrelated product.
There's something to be said about having some tact and knowing your place and where you stand. If you ship a little flashlight app on Android understand that you don't have that kind of room to attach political commentary and activisim next to it. The best thing you can do is to just be the little reliable unchanging app on someone's phone and not try to over reach.
I hate it when apps change long used icons for any reason. Make its hard to find the app. I'm still annoyed about Google changing the icons for all of their android suite a few revisions ago.
If you have to virtue signal, there are better ways to do it than changing the icon.
In a certain way, Free Software is political activism. Disagree with something? Fork it. Not using FLOSS? Contribute to one by using, coding, donating money or trying to make it more popular. Can't or don't want to do that? How about stop complaining?
What I hate about this behaviour is that it’s pure virtue-signalling and surprisingly it’s always done by the most disgusting & morally-bankrupt companies ever, the same ones who will screw employees, customers & partners alike at every potential opportunity.
It feels similar to these YouTube personalities who film themselves giving money to the homeless and that’s not a coincidence; it “feels” that way because the motive is the same: virtue-signalling.
If you want to support a political cause, donate $$$ towards it and don’t even tell me about it. Changing a homescreen logo provides dubious value to the cause (especially to an already well-known one) in comparison.
Something I don't see mentioned in this thread- on Android you can load custom icon packs. I standardize my icons (a solid color, outlined, version of the app logo) across all my apps, so I don't experience it when developers change their app icons.
Using a free(er) platform like Android (compared to iOS) affords me this opportunity for customization.
If it's my app, I'll use my logo. I consider the logo an integral part of the application's identity and I should control its identity. I promise I'll do my best to make it easily and readily recognizable, regardless of it using national colors, a rainbow or shades of white, pink and blue. If you don't like it, it's your problem, not mine.
I'm always confused by statements like these. You can see similar dynamics playing out on artists' social media feeds for example, where people are upset when the artist talks about politics instead of their craft. Artists, developers, and everyone else is at the end of the day still a human being, not a machine that's there only to produce the content you want to consume. Getting a useful app for free (!) and then getting upset over what color its icon is or whatnot seems absurdly entitled.
It's not the same. Icons are partly a functional component, rather than being purely aesthetic. If I just can't find the app I'm looking for due to there being something wrong with the icon, I certainly get annoyed.
For people who identify things primarily by color rather than shape, I can totally see a temporary palette swap causing that. Others might go mostly by the shape, and care less. (I'm one of those people, though the way Google's apps changed colors three years ago was an exception: they basically ended up applying the principles of camouflage to break the shapes in a way that completely destroyed my ability to distinguish them at a glance.)
And then there are people who just go by spatial location, or by the text, and couldn't tell you the first thing about the icon itself. I assume those people would instead be driven up the walls if the icons were re-arranged automatically by app popularity, or if apps were constantly being renamed.
> Getting a useful app for free (!)
The author did say these were "likely" apps they had paid for.
Just because a person has political views doesn’t mean they need to push them out to every medium possible.
When I’m at work I expect people to mostly talk about work, not divide the office by broadcasting controversial political views via their avatar and posting hot takes in their status messages.
With developers I expect the apps to solve some problem I have. That’s it. I know a person, or team of people, wrote it but their politics are completely irrelevant to their ability to solve my problem via and app. I also don’t need to know about their family, hobbies, religion, or dreams.
Art and politics have always been intervened, and there are many political artists (like Bono, Sting, etc) that made it their gimmick to raise their voice on every political subject that triggers them. That is ok, people got used to it and it has become part of their personality.
But if a defragmentation tool suddently rubs some "Free Tibet" activism into your face by changing their app logo and prompting a message, one can rightfully wonder what the developer is trying to achieve aside from alienating part of the userbase.
Now that so many big corps change their logo colors to rainbow in July, I think it's no longer a strong statement. Not that it really was one, if certain locales were excluded from it. I guess ceasing business with countries which don't follow human rights requires too much courage.
Given that the GOP in Texas made the declaration that “homosexuality is an abnormal lifestyle choice” part of their platform, It’s probably nice for people to know which companies are at least not echoing that, even if it’s not full throated support. I doubt chik fila is changing their logo for instance
You can consider not using the product? If you can't stomach a temporary icon change, which I'm guessing has to do with either Pride or Juneteenth, then I'm sure the app organization and society wouldn't mind you finding an alternative.
The latter has become a federal holiday so it's not exactly activism IMO to show alliance with that.
> As part of that bargain, you have to identify your app visually so I can find it.
If the problem is that apps change logos then that should be criticized, not activism. If the problem is with political causes that should be the focus, not interface. To mix both seems an excuse to legitimate one criticism using the other.
Just another symptom of the users not truly having control over "their" devices.
If you don't like the logo, swap it the application files. Oh wait, sources are unavailable? If you want your phone to serve you, guess you better jump on the FLOSS bandwagon.
CleanMyMac put a Ukrainian flag in my toolbar and I promptly uninstalled CleanMyMac and cancelled my subscription. I was already using AppCleaner (OSS?) for most uninstalls anyways.
The author didn’t bother to state which political statements they were upset about; neither did they bother to say something like “all of them,” which would have been trivial. So we are left to guess which political activism they find annoying.
Given the timing, there’s a very good chance that it’s related to Pride month here in the US. It seems even more probable when you consider the context: very few companies change their logos for Juneteenth (the other contender), but many companies slap a rainbow on it for Pride.
So: odds are, the author is upset about having LGBTQ “activism” pushed on their devices.
I would invite everyone to remember this the next time someone wants a “politics-free” workspace. Specifically, remember that a vague assertion that LGBTQ people exist (a rainbow, on a logo), is what some folks consider “political.”
> So: odds are, the author is upset about having LGBTQ “activism” pushed on their devices.
Your guess is probably correct. We all know why they aren't being explicit about it, right? Someone here literally threatened that they "actively" won't hire me for commenting on this post :-)
> Specifically, remember that a vague assertion that LGBTQ people exist
It's not vague at all, it's literally a flag. And it's not an acknowledgment of existence of some group. The most charitable interpretation is that it's a protest against heteronormativity, which many people naturally support.
> is what some folks consider “political.”
Of course it is political, pretending it isn't is disingenuous.
I thought it was pretty clear that the author objected to it on principle.
I think I do as well, I don't really want all the icons on my phone changing colors and shapes every other day since that is just bad UX when I'm hunting for the right button.
And when it comes to politics I don't want anyone else's politics pushed into my personal life when I don't expect to encounter it, even if I agree with it. It is particularly difficult these days to donate to any worthy cause because you know that it is interpreted as an invitation to harassment and you'll get put onto lists that get sold and get bombarded with mail, e-mail and door-to-door solicitation.
I've practically had to throw people off my property -- for causes that I agree with and donate to similar organizations -- because they're just being rude about my personal space.
If you show up on my porch waving a pride flag I'm going to be very irritated and ask you to leave. And you might want to be careful about asserting that anyone who doesn't like having a pride flag pushed in their face is automatically homophobic/transphobic. There are those of us who are non-neurotypical who find all the demands on our attention by society, in total, just fucking exhausting, and you might want to keep in mind concepts like consent and privacy.
>I would invite everyone to remember this the next time someone wants a “politics-free” workspace. Specifically, remember that a vague assertion that LGBTQ people exist (a rainbow, on a logo), is what some folks consider “political.”
There are many things that "just exist", but one subset of them receives massive media attention, mandatory acknowledgments, and is shielded from a lot of criticism, while another subset is constantly being ridiculed, mocked and villified.
Pride month would be fair if we also had, let's say, Fathers' month, emphasizing the importance of teaching your boys self-reliance, emotional control, delayed gratification. Or housewives' month, praising women that sacrifice careers and spend countless time teaching their kids important skills that will help them achieve independence and success in life.
But no, the media has decided that all these things are not important, but one's sexual orientation, a very private thing that makes many people uncomfortable and has zero relation with actual business, needs to be broadcasted on every corner.
So the whole idea of a politics-free workspace is that we keep these things to our private lives. We don't argue which subcategory deserves a month of acknowledgement, and who can get by with half-a-Friday, we instead focus on actual work. Like have a month of refactoring, or a month of unit tests. Because, you know, having common goals brings people together. And giving one subset of people different rights from another one (even if it's non-monetary tokenism) makes a workplace toxic and increases tension.
The OP may well be opposed to the rainbow flag or not. The fact that they are not allowed to make a facially neutral “no politics on my home screen” statement without HN speculating about some political leaning seems to me to be a pretty clear example of how some progressive movements are encroaching on what used to be neutral space.
Nobody (at least in the West) are denying LGBT people exist. Companies who put the flag up are just virtue signalling.
If the app icon was changed for a single day for Juneteenth would you sympathize with the OP?
The OP was not complaining about the actual political issue. He was complaining about changing the app icon to push their politics. The OP just wants to be able to easily find the app: "As part of that bargain, you have to identify your app visually so I can find it" and doesn't want the app author's politics on his home screen: "I might actually agree with your political cause, but you crossed a line. My device screen is not an appropriate place for your political statements. So cut that shit out"
Let me ask you a question. Would you still be making the same points if the political activism was putting a Russian flag as the app icon? Maybe they feel like there is a dehumanizing effort against Russians since Russians are being called orcs by Ukrainians. Based on your logic that would not be political since a vauge assertion that Russians exist is not political.
Okay, but aesthetic design is important. I am very much a part of pride, but I hate having my phone's homescreen totally redesigned at the whim of some dev somewhere. It highlights an already uncomfortable lack of control.
People have the right to make aesthetic choices about the things in their life. I would be pissed if someone came into my house and painted my walls without my permission. Even if I agree with the cause, it's my choice to make.
in general i would prefer to keep the political activism outside of our tools. It’s a distraction and comes off as inauthentic bandwagoning . I use adblock to block any politicking I see on software so i can get work done
[+] [-] dmkirwan|3 years ago|reply
I think the more general topic of brands taking political stances is worthy of debate, for sure. I tend to think it's fine. If I agree, great. If I don't, then I can choose spend my money at a company whose values align better with mine.
[+] [-] pickovven|3 years ago|reply
Hard to imagine a minor annoyance of logo design would otherwise justify a public post. Living in a pluralistic, multi-cultural society doesn't mean excluding politics from the public sphere. It means tolerating politics in the public sphere, especially if you're ambivalent or even a little annoyed by those politics.
In this example, if it's pride symbols or the Ukrainian flag, or something else -- those will stop being political once the rights are so normalized and obvious, they no longer elicit reactions like this.
[+] [-] mikkergp|3 years ago|reply
I actually disagree. There are lots of inputs my brain is using other than the specific logo when I'm quickly moving through my phone looking for a specific app, and this could totally throw me off. Often times I think to save energy my brain looks for a "low-rez" abstraction of what I'm looking for rather than one that is in full detail. That being said, with everyone requiring an app these days my phone is so overloaded I just search for everything.
Granted, I don't thing the original posters concerns have as much to do with accessibility, and if it takes me a little longer to find an app, so be it.
[+] [-] drewbug01|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hulitu|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] daenz|3 years ago|reply
This idea became mainstream at some point, and the result is that we must now signal what team we're on in everything we create. Abstaining from this signaling just means you're either ignorant of the causes (best assumption) or you're on the other team (worst assumption).
0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_personal_is_political
[+] [-] snowwrestler|3 years ago|reply
For example people don’t choose to be gay, it just happens like being tall or having blue eyes. But in Florida there is a law now saying teachers can’t talk about gay people in school. Totally still fine to talk about tall people, though.
This is why “Pride Month” is a big deal but tall people month is not. Gay people didn’t choose to become “political.” But since they are subjected to that scrutiny, they of course want to stand up for themselves, and other people who value equality under the law want to stand up with them.
[+] [-] Georgelemental|3 years ago|reply
"Wow, you must think working people don't have a right to exist" "I bet you support serfdom and slavery" "How could you say such a thing on May Day?"
[+] [-] borplk|3 years ago|reply
When it comes from a multi billion dollar giant it's still annoying but more understandable that a giant organisation with thousands of people will have a lot going in it.
But when a dude behind a $2.95 "NFT chat bot for your grandma's crypto portfolio" app wants to do it, it's something else.
They need to find another avenue to express their political ideas rather than letting it bleed into an unrelated product.
There's something to be said about having some tact and knowing your place and where you stand. If you ship a little flashlight app on Android understand that you don't have that kind of room to attach political commentary and activisim next to it. The best thing you can do is to just be the little reliable unchanging app on someone's phone and not try to over reach.
[+] [-] thereddaikon|3 years ago|reply
If you have to virtue signal, there are better ways to do it than changing the icon.
[+] [-] marcodiego|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Nextgrid|3 years ago|reply
It feels similar to these YouTube personalities who film themselves giving money to the homeless and that’s not a coincidence; it “feels” that way because the motive is the same: virtue-signalling.
If you want to support a political cause, donate $$$ towards it and don’t even tell me about it. Changing a homescreen logo provides dubious value to the cause (especially to an already well-known one) in comparison.
[+] [-] AlphaWeaver|3 years ago|reply
Using a free(er) platform like Android (compared to iOS) affords me this opportunity for customization.
[+] [-] rbanffy|3 years ago|reply
If it's my app, I'll use my logo. I consider the logo an integral part of the application's identity and I should control its identity. I promise I'll do my best to make it easily and readily recognizable, regardless of it using national colors, a rainbow or shades of white, pink and blue. If you don't like it, it's your problem, not mine.
[+] [-] Etheryte|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jsnell|3 years ago|reply
For people who identify things primarily by color rather than shape, I can totally see a temporary palette swap causing that. Others might go mostly by the shape, and care less. (I'm one of those people, though the way Google's apps changed colors three years ago was an exception: they basically ended up applying the principles of camouflage to break the shapes in a way that completely destroyed my ability to distinguish them at a glance.)
And then there are people who just go by spatial location, or by the text, and couldn't tell you the first thing about the icon itself. I assume those people would instead be driven up the walls if the icons were re-arranged automatically by app popularity, or if apps were constantly being renamed.
> Getting a useful app for free (!)
The author did say these were "likely" apps they had paid for.
[+] [-] proxyon|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] al_borland|3 years ago|reply
When I’m at work I expect people to mostly talk about work, not divide the office by broadcasting controversial political views via their avatar and posting hot takes in their status messages.
With developers I expect the apps to solve some problem I have. That’s it. I know a person, or team of people, wrote it but their politics are completely irrelevant to their ability to solve my problem via and app. I also don’t need to know about their family, hobbies, religion, or dreams.
[+] [-] jansan|3 years ago|reply
But if a defragmentation tool suddently rubs some "Free Tibet" activism into your face by changing their app logo and prompting a message, one can rightfully wonder what the developer is trying to achieve aside from alienating part of the userbase.
[+] [-] barrysteve|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] imwillofficial|3 years ago|reply
Not only is it “thoughts and prayers” or Facebook filter tier support,
Not only is it a usability and accessibility disaster,
It also breaks trust between user and developer.
My device is not the appropriate place for your activism.
[+] [-] RicoElectrico|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mikkergp|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] otachack|3 years ago|reply
The latter has become a federal holiday so it's not exactly activism IMO to show alliance with that.
[+] [-] ohCh6zos|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] 11amxn11|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] SllX|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mrcartmeneses|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] hourago|3 years ago|reply
If the problem is that apps change logos then that should be criticized, not activism. If the problem is with political causes that should be the focus, not interface. To mix both seems an excuse to legitimate one criticism using the other.
[+] [-] imwillofficial|3 years ago|reply
Also critiquing activism is completely valid.
Passionately held belief is not somehow above reproach at all times
[+] [-] rhn_mk1|3 years ago|reply
If you don't like the logo, swap it the application files. Oh wait, sources are unavailable? If you want your phone to serve you, guess you better jump on the FLOSS bandwagon.
[+] [-] jp57|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tobbob|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] proxyon|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] drewbug01|3 years ago|reply
Given the timing, there’s a very good chance that it’s related to Pride month here in the US. It seems even more probable when you consider the context: very few companies change their logos for Juneteenth (the other contender), but many companies slap a rainbow on it for Pride.
So: odds are, the author is upset about having LGBTQ “activism” pushed on their devices.
I would invite everyone to remember this the next time someone wants a “politics-free” workspace. Specifically, remember that a vague assertion that LGBTQ people exist (a rainbow, on a logo), is what some folks consider “political.”
[+] [-] cato_the_elder|3 years ago|reply
Your guess is probably correct. We all know why they aren't being explicit about it, right? Someone here literally threatened that they "actively" won't hire me for commenting on this post :-)
> Specifically, remember that a vague assertion that LGBTQ people exist
It's not vague at all, it's literally a flag. And it's not an acknowledgment of existence of some group. The most charitable interpretation is that it's a protest against heteronormativity, which many people naturally support.
> is what some folks consider “political.”
Of course it is political, pretending it isn't is disingenuous.
[+] [-] lamontcg|3 years ago|reply
I think I do as well, I don't really want all the icons on my phone changing colors and shapes every other day since that is just bad UX when I'm hunting for the right button.
And when it comes to politics I don't want anyone else's politics pushed into my personal life when I don't expect to encounter it, even if I agree with it. It is particularly difficult these days to donate to any worthy cause because you know that it is interpreted as an invitation to harassment and you'll get put onto lists that get sold and get bombarded with mail, e-mail and door-to-door solicitation.
I've practically had to throw people off my property -- for causes that I agree with and donate to similar organizations -- because they're just being rude about my personal space.
If you show up on my porch waving a pride flag I'm going to be very irritated and ask you to leave. And you might want to be careful about asserting that anyone who doesn't like having a pride flag pushed in their face is automatically homophobic/transphobic. There are those of us who are non-neurotypical who find all the demands on our attention by society, in total, just fucking exhausting, and you might want to keep in mind concepts like consent and privacy.
[+] [-] UkrainianJew|3 years ago|reply
There are many things that "just exist", but one subset of them receives massive media attention, mandatory acknowledgments, and is shielded from a lot of criticism, while another subset is constantly being ridiculed, mocked and villified.
Pride month would be fair if we also had, let's say, Fathers' month, emphasizing the importance of teaching your boys self-reliance, emotional control, delayed gratification. Or housewives' month, praising women that sacrifice careers and spend countless time teaching their kids important skills that will help them achieve independence and success in life.
But no, the media has decided that all these things are not important, but one's sexual orientation, a very private thing that makes many people uncomfortable and has zero relation with actual business, needs to be broadcasted on every corner.
So the whole idea of a politics-free workspace is that we keep these things to our private lives. We don't argue which subcategory deserves a month of acknowledgement, and who can get by with half-a-Friday, we instead focus on actual work. Like have a month of refactoring, or a month of unit tests. Because, you know, having common goals brings people together. And giving one subset of people different rights from another one (even if it's non-monetary tokenism) makes a workplace toxic and increases tension.
[+] [-] porknubbins|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] _-david-_|3 years ago|reply
Nobody (at least in the West) are denying LGBT people exist. Companies who put the flag up are just virtue signalling.
If the app icon was changed for a single day for Juneteenth would you sympathize with the OP?
The OP was not complaining about the actual political issue. He was complaining about changing the app icon to push their politics. The OP just wants to be able to easily find the app: "As part of that bargain, you have to identify your app visually so I can find it" and doesn't want the app author's politics on his home screen: "I might actually agree with your political cause, but you crossed a line. My device screen is not an appropriate place for your political statements. So cut that shit out"
Let me ask you a question. Would you still be making the same points if the political activism was putting a Russian flag as the app icon? Maybe they feel like there is a dehumanizing effort against Russians since Russians are being called orcs by Ukrainians. Based on your logic that would not be political since a vauge assertion that Russians exist is not political.
[+] [-] onionisafruit|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tonymet|3 years ago|reply
Also, you can have too much of a good thing. Doesn't mean said thing is bad.
[+] [-] spencerchubb|3 years ago|reply
From the author: "I might actually agree with your political cause, but you crossed a line."
[+] [-] wdb|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ankushnarula|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Serenacula|3 years ago|reply
People have the right to make aesthetic choices about the things in their life. I would be pissed if someone came into my house and painted my walls without my permission. Even if I agree with the cause, it's my choice to make.
[+] [-] sumthinprofound|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tonymet|3 years ago|reply