Shrink Wrap
The New York Times has run an interesting article about the packaging of consumer products over the years, and how the general trend is for packaging to become smaller.
But this time it’s not from marketers and admen trying to con the consumer, it’s about environmentalism! Smaller packages mean less waste and reduced production costs. Recycling has a major part to play; it doesn’t take an environmental engineer to know that making products out of recycled and recyclable materials means less crap winds up in landfills. (And if they want, marketers can spin it as new “to-go” sizes.)
“Packaging offers major opportunities for reducing energy use and greenhouse gases, and for saving the $4 billion worth of materials that now ends up in landfills,” said Matt Hale, director of the agency’s Office of Solid Waste.
Yes, that’s all good, but how is this going to affect we, the designers and brandsmiths of the world? Smaller packages mean less surface area, which means we have to pick and choose the content more carefully.
I for one herald this change, and hopefully it will give designers the right to finally cut the crap off the face of consumer goods. Cereal boxes are notorious for this — the fronts are dominated with facts and logos all shouting for attention. Maybe if the box was smaller, we could stick to business.
