In August 2025, the White House announced the creation of a new federal design initiative: America by Design. The executive order establishes a National Design Studio (NDS), led by Airbnb co-founder Joe Gebbia, who now holds the title Chief Design Officer of the United States. The stated goal: overhaul the government's digital and physical interfaces, unify design systems across agencies, and deliver a more "beautiful" user experience - framed explicitly by Gebbia and the administration as the "Apple Store of government."
Superficially, it reads like major progress for designers and creatives.
In practice, it's another symbolic move designed to manufacture the appearance of innovation while avoiding any real institutional reform. What the administration fails to understand, and what this appointment makes obvious, is that design in government is not aesthetic problem solving.
"Design in government is not aesthetic problem solving. It is structural systems work."
THE STRUCTURE BEHIND THE STUDIO
The initiative is already operating on borrowed time. The NDS is a temporary body, expected to dissolve in three years. It reports to the White House Chief of Staff and must deliver first-phase "improvements" by July 4, 2026 - a date that conveniently aligns with the semiquincentennial of the United States.
IN SHORT:
- • The deadlines are purely symbolic
- • The deliverables are ambiguous
- • The incentives are political
The design mandate is framed as coordination:
create a coherent design language, reduce duplicative digital infrastructure, and improve the usability of government interfaces. But none of these tasks matter if they are not paired with authority. This office has no real influence over regulation, procurement, or interagency coordination beyond surface-level adoption. There are no legal requirements to implement NDS standards. There is no policy scaffolding around service delivery. There is no funding pipeline beyond the initial allocation. Without that infrastructure, this becomes yet another ceremonial appointment masquerading as structural change.
GEBBIA'S APPOINTMENT:
HIGH SIGNAL, LOW LEVERAGE
Joe Gebbia is a respected designer. His tenure at Airbnb, RISD, industrial design at Samara, is strong.
But there is a clear misalignment between his skill set and the architecture of government delivery. This isn't a critique of Gebbia's capabilities. It's a critique of the context in which he's been placed.
He has no mandate to alter the systems behind the surfaces. He cannot restructure agencies. He cannot rewrite federal language. He cannot enforce accessibility compliance. He cannot resolve interdepartmental latency. And unless the executive order is extended or institutionalized beyond 2028, this role will disappear before it has the chance to matter.
INFRASTRUCTURE DISMANTLING (Q1 2025):
Worse, Gebbia's appointment comes after the administration systematically dismantled the very civic design infrastructure that would have enabled this work:
- ▸ The U.S. Digital Service was downsized
- ▸ 18F, the government's internal design and development consultancy, was disbanded
- ▸ Entire CDC design teams were terminated
- ▸ Veterans of federal UX, content, and research roles were pushed out or ignored
So the same government that erased its own digital capacity is now repackaging the role of "Chief Design Officer" as a bold leap forward. This is not forward movement. It's a reset to zero with slightly different branding.
HISTORICAL CONTRAST:
WHAT REAL FEDERAL DESIGN LOOKED LIKE
This isn't the first time a U.S. administration has tried to formalize design at the national level. In 1972, under the Nixon administration, the Federal Design Improvement Program (FDIP) was launched through the National Endowment for the Arts. It was not a three-year studio. It was a systemic initiative to embed design across every touchpoint of government communications and infrastructure.
FDIP OPERATIONAL SUCCESSES:
- ▸ The NASA worm logo
- ▸ The national highway signage system
- ▸ The visual identity system for the National Park Service
- ▸ Clear, accessible government publications, posters, and wayfinding systems
It was not limited to interface design. It included architectural modernization, signage reform, and the commissioning of public art that served narrative and aspirational functions. It treated design as civic infrastructure, not aesthetic dressing.
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS MATRIX
| DIMENSION | 1970s FDIP | 2025 AMERICA BY DESIGN |
|---|---|---|
| Duration | Multi-decade cultural reform | 3-year temporary studio |
| Authority | Embedded within NEA and federal policy | Advisory only, no enforcement |
| Outputs | Lasting icons, signage systems | TBD interfaces and style guides |
| Capacity strategy | Build and retain institutional knowledge | Outsource and replace |
| Vision | Design as civic clarity | Design as visual UX |
"You don't replace generational cultural memory with a Figma component library."
DESIGN IS NOT THE INTERFACE
This administration is mistaking design for interface work. But interface is the skin. Real design in government happens in policy language, operational workflows, service eligibility logic, and institutional feedback loops.
A clean visual system doesn't change the fact that most Americans experience government through confusion, delay, and silence. A beautiful login screen doesn't rewrite the policy that blocks a citizen from qualifying for benefits. A mobile-optimized FEMA site doesn't matter if disaster response is delayed by weeks due to logistical misalignment between agencies.
You don't fix that with typeface choices. You fix it by rebuilding how the government organizes care and consequence. That takes policy authority, not visual hierarchy.
THE GAP BETWEEN GOVERNMENT AND PEOPLE IS NOT AESTHETIC
The White House claims that design can improve trust. But trust isn't a function of beauty. It's a function of reliability.
TRUST REQUIRES:
- ▸ Clear communication
- ▸ Accessible service pathways
- ▸ Predictable delivery timelines
- ▸ Human-centered conflict resolution
None of that is outlined in this initiative. None of it can be outsourced to design contractors. None of it can be solved through interface unification.
WHAT REAL INSTITUTIONAL INNOVATION WOULD ACTUALLY LOOK LIKE
ANCHOR IMAGINATION IN PUBLIC PURPOSE
Design should not serve branding, it should serve belief. Imagine a future-oriented public media network that codesigns with its citizens. Not as users, but as participants.
BUILD PERMANENT EXPERIENCE UNITS, NOT POP-UP STUDIOS
Embed Experience Divisions inside every agency. Cross-functional teams tasked not with decoration, but with delivery. They should translate law into life. Policy into language. Services into human systems.
USE DESIGN TO SURFACE PAIN, NOT MASK IT
Design systems should not track clicks, they should track confusion, friction, and exclusion. Build interfaces that surface uncertainty. Let the state become legible again.
TREAT DESIGN AS CIVIC RHETORIC
Design is how a state speaks. If you strip public memory, you leave only brand, detached from meaning. Invest in design as a civic grammar. Typography, color, layout as declarative expression.
FINAL WORD
If we want government services that exceed expectations, we need to restore faith in the possibility of a state that serves. We need a container sturdy enough to hold public trust - one that prioritizes funding conversation spaces, building experience continuity across services, and supporting public narratives where citizens act as collaborators.
ABEL PAUL GEORGE
Abel Paul George is a Design Futurist whose work spans tech, consumer products, fashion, and entertainment. He leads an advisory firm focused on strategic positioning across private enterprise, government, and sovereign wealth.
Return to Home →