Brandon Donnelly — Daily insights for city builders. Published since 2013 by Toronto-based real estate developer Brandon Donnelly. — Page 1030

Surface Magazine – and more specifically the CEO of Surface Magazine – recently published this article criticizing the “trend” toward designing for Instagrammable moments.

Here is an excerpt:

We—and yes, this includes architects, too—have succumbed to the pressures of gaining followers, likes, and comments. High-priced, difficult-to-attain architecture degrees are now, incomprehensibly, being used to create “Instagrammable” installations for things like impromptu selfie fashion shoots and hotel lobby photo booths. The whole thing is, I must say, sad. It’s embarrassing enough that our team at Surface has received press releases from architects promoting their latest project with “Instagram-friendly interiors.” They can’t be serious.

And here are his final words:

If retail is dead , then its rebirth will depend on creating memorable atmospheres that don’t call for #✌💙👯🙋📷.

I certainly appreciate the push for lasting and memorable spaces, but, at the same time, I can’t say I’m nearly as fussed about lobby selfies and the alleged timelessness of Instagram. 

In fact, I think it would be an interesting exercise to study how social media may be impacting the way we design physical spaces.

Maybe it is simply a fad being promulgated by “knucklehead junior marketers” or maybe 100 years from now nerdy architectural historians will look back on that quaint period of time when we designed spaces to service rudimentary 2D images shared amongst friends.

Whatever the case may be, I think that architecture, like all art, should embody the milieu in which it was designed. 

But often  we have biases telling us that what is new is not as good as what’s existing and already accepted.

In addition to email, phone, and text, we live in a world where you can also easily and directly connect with people on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Tumblr, Snapchat, Swarm, WhatsApp, Slack, as well as on many other platforms.

As much as I love tech, I personally find this exhausting and far too distracting. So early last year I turned off all social media and messaging notifications – on both mobile and desktop – other than on the two platforms that I most commonly use. (Facebook and LinkedIn are not on this shortlist.)

The result is that I am now missing (and consequently ignoring) a ton of direct messages. But as the saying goes, there’s no such thing as too much information, just poor filters. If you really want to reach me, I am not hard to find. You’re reading my public and daily journal right now.

Zooming out from social media DMs, I am reminded of one of my all-time favorite Seth Godin posts where he talks about the value in saying no – which is, of course, just another kind of filter:

No I can’t meet with you, no I can’t sell it to you at this price, no I can’t do this job justice, no I can’t come to your party, no I can’t help you. I’m sorry, but no, I can’t. Not if I want to do the very things that people value my work for.

No is the foundation that we can build our yes on.

And nobody should feel bad for saying no. A friend of mine likes to remind me that no is the second best answer. Yes is obviously the best, but a firm no is far better than an indecisive maybe that leaves everyone wondering what to do next.

I should probably say no more often than I do. But I am working on it. Every now and then I remind myself that there’s huge value in saying no. Today’s post is that reminder and maybe it will be yours too.

Photo by Kai Pilger on Unsplash

Dan Gilbert – billionaire Detroit promoter and owner of the Cleveland Cavaliers – penned this statement in response to the city’s failed Amazon HQ2 bid. He chalked up the loss to reputational hangover:

We are still dealing with the unique radioactive-like reputational fallout of 50-60 years of economic decline, disinvestment, municipal bankruptcy, and all of the other associated negative consequences of that extraordinarily long period of time.

This was the “elephant in the room”, though his statement is primarily centered around both talent and transportation – the two critical and lacking ingredients that allegedly disqualified Detroit.

He ends by stressing the importance of physically visiting Detroit 2018. That is the only way, he says, people will fully appreciate the change and momentum that has taken hold in the city. (I experienced Detroit 2016 so I guess I’m overdue.)

In response to this, Aaron Renn wrote this follow-up post suggesting that Dan take a page out of Tony Hsieh’s playbook. Tony is the founder of Zappos and the Downtown Project in Las Vegas. 

To bring people to downtown Las Vegas, Tony – somewhat famously – rented 50 apartments in one of the only high-rises, called them “crash pads”, and offered them out for free to people who wanted to come and check out what was happening in downtown Vegas and with the Downtown Project.

That’s certainly one way to lower the friction. 

Equally interesting to me about this strategy, though, is that it was presumably necessary (he did it, right?) just to bring people to another part of Vegas, let alone another city altogether. 

Full disclosure, I’ve never been to Vegas. But I understand that many people visit the place. So for me it speaks to the kinds of inducements that may be necessary just to revive or kickstart a place.

Photo by Matthew Brzozowski on Unsplash