Late Thursday night it was brought to my attention that Matt Bargell, the First Place Winner in the recent Celebrate QuarkXPress Postcard Competition, is a contract designer for X-Ray Magazine, one of the companies furnishing prizes for the contest.
UPDATED: Monday, 6 June 2005
Additionally, X‑Ray’s publisher and editor, is Cyndie Shaffstall, who also runs the QuarkAlliance program for Quark, Inc. Cyndie was also instrumental in arranging some of the prizes that were contributed to the QuarkXPress Postcard Competition, which began distribution from various points to the winners of that contest immediately following the Tuesday announcement.
After initially learning about the matter Thursday night, I verified the information Friday. At which point I contacted Matt, who confirmed via e‑mail that at the time he entered he did know that X‑Ray Magazine subscriptions were among the prizes for which he was competing (though, given his association to the magazine, I doubt it was a prize he really needed).
The reason competitions of this sort disallow entries from employees et al and their families is to remove the temptation for, and appearance of, bias in judgements. During the handful of e‑mail messages Matt and I exchanged (all related to the contest), the only professional affiliations indicated by Matt were to his design firm, Bargell Studios, and Rodderboy, his apparel company. X‑Ray was never mentioned.
Until Friday when I confirmed Matt’s credits in the X‑Ray masthead as well as on the magazine’s Website, I was completely unaware of his status as a contract designer to X‑Ray. Though I am a subscriber to that magazine, I also subscribe to InDesign Magazine, Step Inside Design Magazine, Proxy, Photoshop User, Popular Science, and a dozen other periodicals I read, glance through, or allow to pile up monthly. Rarely do I have the time to read every word of a magazine, much less know the names of everyone in the masthead unless I was the one to lay it out. In fact, I would be hard pressed to name anyone but the editors and my favorite columnists at any of the above periodicals.
While judging the contest entries I was not aware of Matt’s affiliation with X‑Ray.
Similarly, I do not believe Matt intended to conceal that fact. Neither he nor any of the other entrants disclosed a client list, nor was it requested. Like any successful graphic designer, Matt gets around. X‑Ray was just one of his clients.
What should be done now… Is a moot question.
Despite substantial publicity for the Celebrate QuarkXPress Postcard Competition including verified and repeated publicity on, among others, QuarkVSInDesign.com, CreativePro.com, TUAW.com, The PowerXChange, X‑Ray Magazine’s website, The Design Weblog, The Magazine Weblog, About.com, Quark’s own Quark.com User Forums, the world’s largest and most active QuarkXPress discussion groups and mailing lists, and the Websites and newsletters of many of the companies furnishing prizes, we received exactly three entries celebrating QuarkXPress. While it should not be construed in any way as diminishing the talent and creativity evident in the designs, all three entries are on display as winners of the contest.
In the Celebrate InDesign Postcard Competition the number of entries was significantly greather than three, though the exact count is not relevant to this discussion. This contest received only the minimum number of entries required to satisfy the winning slots. In fact, before receiving Matt’s entry on 1 May, 2005, I had already resolved to nullify the Celebrate QuarkXPress Postcard Competition should it ultimately receive fewer than three entries. I remained fast to the resolution, even with Matt’s entry in hand, until the arrival of the third entry more than a week later.
The question that truly matters is whether Matt’s association to X‑Ray or any other entity furnishing prizes was known to me and had an effect on my judgement of the contest entries and upon the award of his current status as 1st Place Winner in this competition. The answer to both is no.
As his association to a prize contributor was not known until days after the public confirmation of his design as a winner, it could not factor into my judgement of the winning entries. Matt’s highly creative, whimsical, and obviously skilled “QuarkMan Delivers” design clearly was, and remains, the best of the entries received in the Celebrate QuarkXPress Postcard Competition. Therefore its status as 1st Place Winner stands.
Sincerely,
Pariah S. Burke
Editor-In-Chief
Update: Monday, 6 June 2005
Saturday, after publishing my statement about the Celebrate QuarkXPress Postcard Competition and reaffirming Matt Bargell as the 1st Place Winner, I received an e‑mail from Matt in support of my statement.
Moreover, though my decision that Matt’s entry retain its status as 1st Place Winner entitles him to keep the prizes awarded to that position, he has voluntary elected to donate his winnings to his hometown junior college and high school.
The below is quoted directly from Matt’s e‑mail to me (with permission):
I am in complete support of any statement or any decision you feel is necessary even if this meant my foregoing any of the prizes and/or being disqualified as the winner of the contest.
If I am to remain the winner, I would like to request that my prizes be donated to a respected design school or some kind of student organization (or another individual) that we decide is worthy. I feel like this would be the right thing to do on my end. Honestly, the fact [that] you chose my design is reward enough for me.
After looking into which organization is more in need of which prize, Matt will donate his winnings to either, or both, Northeastern Junior College and Sterling High School, both in Sterling, Colorado.
While I thought winning this contest honored Matt and his design, it was in fact he who was honoring QuarkVSInDesign.com and the other winners and entrants of these two contests. I hope you will join me in applauding Matt’s integrity and generosity.
Is that the one that was done in InDesign? *eye roll*
I’ve got to share a real lack of respect for this decision of yours Pariah. The issue isn’t whether or not Matt “knew” he was a disqualified applicant before you judged his work. I believe you as a courtesy, as I obviously don’t know you, but clealry there is a real error in judgement to allow Matt’s win to stand. You’ve stated that the rule only exists (I’m paraphrasing) “to disallow the potential of bias in judgement”. Well…now, by not holding yourself or Matt accountable to the rules set forth, you’ve seriously created the appearance of “bias” and a complete disregard for your own credibility and the business you represent. To set aside the rule because you can “justify” that action, is still ulimately dishonest…as you know the rule as well, and yet you are simply casting it aside. This rule that is an issue here isn’t one that is open to interpretation as some “laws” are per se, but is simple and black and white.…but when you make a decision like this to allow the winner to still maintain their prize after you yourself have judged the matter.…well, it’s blaringly obvious that you probably mean well.…but in fact are rewriting the rule to accomodate your opinion rather than letting the rule stand and let an honest mistake suffer honest consequences. Now the whole matter is tainted with an apearance of justified dishonesty and your own repuation is open to a black eye. People should honor what’s right regardless of whether they can explain it away or not.
I think it is a very fair solution to the problem. If he was the best he was the best and deserves the win. For him to donate the prizes just shows how unselfish Matt is and how willing he is to be fair. After hearing there were only 3 Quark entries I wished I submitted. The InDesign stuff was far superior to the Quark excpet for the Robot guy.
The QuarkMan was by far my personal favorite of the Quark entries. It seemed to jump from the pages of the ’50’s pulps. The little “X” Press-wing fighters providing cover were a stroke of genius.
(Disclosure: I was involved in no way whatsoever with contest judging, nor did Pariah solicit any commentary in any form from me on the entries. When the winners were announced, I found out along with everyone else).
I totally agree with Jason above. Whether the design is good or not, the rule should stand and the 1st runner up should get the prize and donate to as a charitable contribution too. Many others who could have won this contest did NOT submit because of the rule and it would only be fair if they are allowed to enter the contest as well (redo the Quark part or cancel it).
Quoting Jason: “let an honest mistake suffer honest consequences”
and quoting Samuel:
“(Disclosure: I was involved in no way whatsoever with contest judging, nor did Pariah solicit any commentary in any form from me on the entries. When the winners were announced, I found out along with everyone else).”
p.s. I don’t mean to sound harsh, just trying to be fair.