A preoccupation with social engineering hampers the innovative and wealth-generating potential of design.

Evgeny Morozov provides a damning critique of those who believe that social-networking tools are the spark that ignited recent political uprisings.

Now that many public sector bodies, charities and businesses are faced with the prospect of severe cutbacks in light of the government’s spending review, managers everywhere will be brainstorming to find their own ways of resolving the mess they’re in.

In an ever-changing industry and uncertain economic times, is it really wise to invest so much time, money and effort into long-term business plans?

The launch event of the Big Potatoes maniesto.

Is it irresponsible to want design that is radical, experimental, is risky and that can challenge the brief? Or if not, then what is design for? And why does any of this matter?

Last Month’s Media 140 London event looked at how brands can make the most out of social media. As Martyn Perks watched the tweeters steal the limelight from the speakers, he wondered how brands can avoid the same thing happening to them.

Forget the police: a new crime-buster is on the block. Designers claim they can lead the charge in the fight against crime.

Social media is less about searching for new ideas than it is about brand building and loyalty. But brands need more than loyalty to remain competitive, especially in a recession. The excitement in social media might turn out to be an unfortunate diversion away from the necessary task of having to invest in the long-term. If that turns out to be true, we may all become more disloyal because of it and decide to shop elsewhere.