Red-Light Cameras Not So Special?
Cubs Combat Casino
PHOTOS: Peaches And Amanda Blank At Metro
The Return of The Chicagoist Reader Meet-Up
County Sales Tax Rollback Vetoed - Here We Go Again
If you're a fan of the current Trib design and layout, you might want to stash this week's papers away in the basement; the redesigned Trib launches a week from today. And to celebrate, the Trib will be offering up free copies of the Trib all day next Monday to give you a chance to check out the redesign.
We've spoken our mind about it before (as did some of you) and we're still not into it. In his letter to the readership, Trib Editor Gerry Kern calls the new Trib, "bolder and brighter, better organized and more relevant to your daily life." Fine, but the new design just seems clunky to us; we had nothing against the current design of the Trib. If the Trib really wants to stay relevant, we hope they've decided to also examine the actual content of the paper. I'm not saying there are any particular columnists that are awful or should be cut. On the contrary, there are a few I personally enjoy reading on a regular basis (Zorn, Kot, Maureen, etc.) And I'm not the only one who thinks the Trib still produces plenty of great, relevant reading. But the Trib's recent flirtation with Mariotti shows not only a lack of awareness in what readers like, but it shows a potential unwillingness to actually improve on the content of the paper. Would Mariotti really have been that different with the Trib than with the S-T? My magic 8-ball says "not likely."
My point (I swear there is one) is simply this: you can use bigger fonts and bigger pictures all you want, but turning the Trib into a newspaper version of Us Weekly will only take you so far. Maybe I'm wrong; maybe there is more substance to this relaunch than just slapping on a new coat of paint. We'll see next Monday. But, for now, this move smells of desperation so I'm not holding my breath.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Looks more like Crain's than Us to me; or maybe Ad Age.
Actually, it looks like a minor-market newspaper. Like something you'd see in Dallas or St. Louis.
It could have been a lot worse, I guess... wilder layout with the Sun-Times' headline writing.. ahem... savvy.
Could be way worse.
Still looks cowtown, minor market and garish. Trying to be the internet will not sell more papers.
I think it looks good.
And yeah it looks almost exactly like crain's though.
I am interested in what you guys/gals think might be a better design. This design apparently does not offend me as much as it does others, but I know little about design.
Any ideas? What would you do to remake the design of the Trib?
Putting a giant picture on the front makes it look dumbed-down.
However, I will hold judgement until I see what the inside pages are like. If ALL the pages have large pictures, and thus LESS text, i.e., less information, then I will be very disappointed.
How about a web redesign of chicagotribune.com- What a crappy website, my cousins best friend blog looks better.
Since I doubt they're increasing the page count and have already shrunk the size of pages, it looks like giant pictures are replacing, ya know, actual news. The dumbing down of America continues...
Pass. Where's the refresh button on that web page of a front page?
+1 in the "it could be worse" column. what ruins it is the giganto main picture..its obvious they're just doing that to compensate for less copy. the Trib's lifeblood is the long investigative story. If that goes, so does the Tribune. I also hope they bring back more local focus to the CITY. stop pandering to the fricking suburbanites....I'm not counting on it though.
Are they going to have a paint by numbers section?
Here's one take on the decreasing neighborhood coverage by the Tribune.
Other papers in the city, including the web versions of those papers, will likely play a greater role in covering city issues. The Reader (especially in its slimmed-down version) can only do so much, leaving the neighborhood papers as the go-to papers for many people.
With these further Tribune changes, the neighborhood papers, eg., Booster, Chicago Journal, Skyline, News-Star, Hyde Park Herald, Lakefront Outlook may become even more important to average Chicagoans, considering the decrease in city news reporters at the Sun-Times and Tribune.
In vetting local issues with the public--and sometimes getting crooked incumbent aldermen voted out of office--neighborhood papers are the best vehicle. And they are a click away online.
Is it still printed on paper? How about making the website (medium of the future) not suck.
@Matilda:
Simple answer, don't change it. I like the color on the new masthead, that's classic.
But don't change it over all. Put more local focus stories on the front page, and not in the shrieking "OH GOD THE CHILDREN!" manner of the sun-times. A big local story over the fold every day, investigative reports, content. That's gonna move papers.
And make the website not completely tits-up, pants on head retarded.
Ward Up, that's an interesting point but have you ever read the Hyde Park Herald? Calling it a rag insults cleaning materials everywhere.
@ophmarketing:
Having lived in Dallas, the Morning News actually looks more like a real paper than this does.
Ah well, it's about content, right? We shall see.
To whatever's comment: I get your point about the Hyde Park Herald. That is one paper that you have to sift through to determine which regular stories are biased. Some are good. Some are biased.
But don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. The Letters section of the Hyde Park Herald and the Op-Ed articles can give both sides of an issue. Even the Op-Eds that you disagree with 100 per cent serve a function by telling you how the other side thinks.
I think the Herald serves a vital function.
I'd like to see a side-by-side comparison of what regular features/columnists were in the paper before and after.
What is the content change? A specific list would be very insightful.