Creative Industries or Creativity Label? Behind the Scenes of a Big Misunderstanding

Mohsen Saraji Creative Director and Thematic Designer

In recent years, the term “creative industries” has become one of the most widely used terms in the fields of culture, art, urban planning, and even economics. Almost any project that has a bit of a cultural, artistic, or design flavor quickly falls under the umbrella of “creative industries.”

But a simple question remains behind this rapid expansion:
Are we really dealing with an economic-cultural transformation, or a catchy label to justify something else?

In its original definition, creative industries refer to areas in which “ideas” and “human creativity” are transformed into economic value. From design and architecture to gaming, cinema, fashion, interactive experiences, and cultural spaces.

In this definition, creativity is not just a slogan;

It is the core of value production.

But in practice, in many spaces, this concept has undergone a kind of semantic shift.

Creative industries have sometimes become not a value-generating model, but a “beautiful label”;
a label that can be stuck on any project, without necessarily having the logic of creativity in it.

In such a situation, the main danger is not that we use words;
but that words replace reality.

When every project is classified as creative industries simply because it has a different external design or an overall narrative, the boundary between “creative production” and “creative packaging” begins to blur.

In the meantime, a more important issue arises;
that creativity sometimes becomes an official language for project presentation, rather than the result of a real process of design, testing, and experimentation.

In such a situation, projects may seem very attractive, conceptual and futuristic on the surface,
but in practice, in terms of experience, performance or real impact on the audience, they are far from what they claim to be.

True creative industries require a complete chain;
from ideation and design to implementation, exploitation, feedback and continuous improvement.
Creativity in this chain does not happen only at the “start” stage;
it is present all the way.

But when this chain is incomplete, creativity is limited to the “image” level.
That is, something that is seen more than experienced.

In such an environment, even serious projects may be subject to a misunderstanding;
a misunderstanding in which the appearance of creativity is assumed to be the same as “real creativity”.

While the difference between the two is precisely in the extent to which they affect real human lives.

A true creative project must be able to change human behavior, feelings or experiences;
Not just in presentations and slides, but in reality.

Perhaps that is why, in many successful global experiences, creative industries are not just a label;
but a living system that connects culture, economics, design and human experience.

Ultimately, the main question is not whether we are using the term “creative industries” correctly;
but whether we are actually producing creativity, or simply giving creative names to ordinary things.

And this line is sometimes thinner than it seems.