The Ford Pinto made Time Magazine's list of the 50 Worst Cars of All Time. Not for the normal reasons people dislike a car; oddly, not because it was an especially bad car.
See, the Ford Pinto was best known for having a particularly volatile gas tank. It had a tendency to burst into flames when rear-ended. Now, this sounds like a rather severe design flaw - the gas tank was located in the rear of the car, and wasn't sufficiently protected from impact.
Unfortunately, it gets worse. Lawsuits in 1977 alleged that Ford was aware of the design flaw, and released the car to the public without correcting it on the grounds that it was more cost effective. The infamous Ford Pinto Memo contained a Cost-Benefit Analysis in which someone - ostensibly Ford - weighed the cost of repairs against the monetary value of a human life, and decided it would be cheaper to pay for possible lawsuits arising from deaths.
It was later revealed that the memo in question may not have actually originated from within the Ford Motor Company, and that the location of the gas tank - behind the axle - was actually fairly common for the day. The 27 deaths which evidently occurred out of some 2 million vehicles built were not actually significantly higher than the norm. So, was Ford responsible, or not?
The truth is murky, but there are still lessons to be learned.
If Ford was aware that the design of the Pinto posed a significant risk to the public and chose not to correct the flaw, they clearly needed an ethics adjustment. The government should not pass laws they are not willing to be subject to; the designer should not, in good conscience, release to the public something that she would not personally use.
Is this ethical? Is it safe? Is it usable? Does it solve the problem at hand? These are all questions a designer should be asking, along with the more esoteric concerns. Is it beautiful? Is it simple? Is it cost effective?
The designer must ask; would I want to be remembered for this?
I'm looking at you, Ford.
No comments:
Post a Comment