Innovation in Newspaper Design

I never really realized how much the layout of a newspaper can affect the reader until I started looking at papers from around the country and comparing their designs. Creative design can make or break a newspaper, and at a time when more papers are being broken than made, design is more important now than ever before.
Here is the front page from today’s Times Record, a newspaper in western Arkansas.

This front page, in my opinion, is one of the reasons that newspapers are failing. There is one image and four stories. The four stories are perfectly lined up from top to bottom. As one story ends, the next starts directly below the first. The columns are all perfectly centered, the same width and nearly the same length. It is as if the designer put the stories into InDesign and clicked an “auto format” button.
There are some positive aspects of the paper. All of the front page content is local news, something I find increasingly important for smaller, local newspapers. There is a side column (Getting Started) that shows what is in the rest of the paper and gives a good summary, and the first story has a great pull quote. Aside from that, the front page is just entirely too text heavy.

Now, look at a video from www.ted.com , a Website that posts videos from conferences on technology, entertainment and design.

This Polish newspaper designer completely changed the layout of his paper. He says, “I wanted to make posters. Not newspapers, not even magazines – posters.” And that’s what he did. His front pages contain very few words, mostly one gigantic attention-grabbing image. He treats the entire daily like as, “one composition like music…[with] ups and downs.” One page is full of photos and charts, and the next will be full of articles with pictures almost fused into the stories. His re-design of papers all across Eastern Europe was able to increase circulation by up to 100 percent. With print companies all across the U.S. looking for answers to financial uncertainty, I suggest experimenting with innovative design. I mean, what’s left to lose?

G-20 ipod

President Obama recently attended the G-20 sessions to discuss America's place in re-vamping our worlds economy. Most would agree this is a very very important part of Obama's plan, if not the most important. The recession in America has hit everyone in one way or another. Despite its severity, the article by Ben Pershing, focuses on the non-traditional demeanor of Obama and the First Lady. Entitled, "Obama Courts G-20 with Star Power, iPod." Obama is a star, yes. But he is not supposed to be Brad Pitt nor is Michelle Obama supposed to be Angelina Jolie. He is supposed to be the president of the United States of America. 

Rather, than covering the topics discussed by the G-20, Pershing discusses how Obama gave Queen Elizabeth II an ipod. The article also discusses how Michelle Obama "breached royal protocol" by touching the queen's back. Obama is everywhere-- the cover of People Magazine, "60 Minutes," "Jay Leno," etc. No other president has been so informal with the media. But is he too informal? Is he too much of a celebrity, that people are not criticizing his presidency like they should? With Obama's first 100 days in office close to being over, what does America really know about Obama's political agenda? 

Unfortunately, most American's know that the Obama girls are getting a dog, possibly to be named "Moose,". Now, Americans are aware that Obama gave the queen an iPod. Who cares? The answer is tragically enough, a lot of Americans. Otherwise these frivolous, unimportant articles would have stopped being written. 

Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple, should look into having Obama do an iPod commercial. It could be named the "G-20 iPod" and even feature a cameo of the new "First dog,". Obama might be game for the commercial, since he certainly seems to have the time for People and "Leno"; why not Jobs as well?  

The AJC's continuing obsession with Mike Vick

In recent weeks, I have begun to notice that the lead story on ajc.com is more often than not about former Atlanta Falcons quarterback Mike Vick, who is serving jail time on dog fighting charges. I would be curious to see the numbers on the view counts for these stories. Since Vick has gone to jail, I have gotten the impression from everyone I have talked to that he is no longer newsworthy. The people of Atlanta seem to want to forget about him and look forward to a new era of Falcons football led by Matt Ryan.

However, the good 'ole AJC continues to dredge up the past by publishing countless stories about Michael Vick. Even Vick's fiancee said yesterday on television that she could not figure out why the story was still news. I can understand the need for a story such as yesterday's that tells what Vick plans to do when he escapes....errr, is released from prison. However, an almost daily account of the soap opera that is the life of Mike Vick is largely unneeded. The efforts of reporters assigned to the Vick beat could be much better channeled into stories about how the economic crisis is impacting the Atlanta area. The AJC seems to cover the economic crisis only on a national level, rather than on a local level as would be more fitting.

The bottom line is that Mike Vick will never play another game in an Atlanta Falcons uniform. Heck, he may never play another game in the NFL. Consequently, he is no longer relevant enough in Atlanta to warrant an almost daily story about his struggles in the city's daily newspaper.

G-20 summit sparks news as well as bias

The Banner-Herald shrewdly relied on this Associate Press article for their coverage of the G-20 summit, keeping their resources focused on local stories.

I like the lead. It conveys the news hook with a somber tone that emphasizes the story’s significance to any American or international reader.

After that, however, the tone changes, and I’m not so sure I like it. The second graph reads as a mockery of the British Prime Minister and the summit itself, calling the proceedings “a choreographed show of unity.” The article is about other nations’ disagreement with President Obama’s new stimulus spending; it is not an editorial about the ineffectiveness of the summit. This language is effective and well written but would fit better on an opinions page.

This video below is a segment of a newscast, which discusses Obama’s persistent optimism as well as the international disagreements at the summit. I feel that its two-sided approach to the story is much more effective than the AP article.

Watch this at Boston.com

Despite my quarrels with his tone, the author is undoubtedly a good writer. I love his plumbing metaphor for the economic crisis: “Collectively, the measures were an attempt to free the clogged pipes of capitalism….”

The fifth graph, however, could have been worded better. He says the leaders will “meet again in September, in New York in conjunction with the next United Nations General Assembly.” I think he could have found a re-wording that didn’t involve quite so many prepositional phrases beginning with the word “in.” The cluttered phrases are jarring to the reader.

In the seventh graph, we finally get to the content the headline promised. Some of the previous graphs probably should have been tightened in order to move this information more toward the beginning.

I’m not really satisfied with the ending of the article either. It appears to be a last attempt by the author to slide in his apparent scorn for the G-20 summit. I think it’s legitimate information, but it doesn’t work as a conclusion for this particular article.

The LA Times produced a less biased article in their editorial section (of all places), covering the same story with a more appropriate tone. It is also much more to-the-point than the AP story.

Sacrificing Visuals

As the economy continues to decline, the journalism industry is struggling to find more ways to cut costs and save their ship. As more metro newspapers eliminate circulation, or shut down print altogether, readers are left looking for more localized news online.

We, as students, have been motivated by the emergence of a different type of journalism -- you know, for the web -- but what are we sacrificing by making the switch to online? Will it all be glitz and glamour?

To be honest -- it’s not a pretty site. And that’s no typo; I’m talking site as in web site.

I know I've picked on the Atlanta Journal-Constitution before, but after hearing that it will no longer circulate to Athens, we are all faced with a new situation. Will we continue to read the AJC, even online?

Does a move to online really mean we have to skimp out on visuals? Printing photos can be a nightmare, so it only makes sense that moving to online calls for the use of those beautiful screens! And yet, both the AJC and Athens Banner-Herald lack prominent news photos on the front page of their web sites.

Don’t know what I mean? Take a look at Online Athens. Right now the only photo (without scrolling down) is half of a picture of a woman reading. As for the AJC, there’s a photo of firefighters in front of a house, a prom couple and Madonna.

CBS Sunday Morning News ran a piece on the decline of the newspaper on March 29, 2009. Here is the entire thing, approx 10 min. long:



The print version can be found here.

There is a quote that explains what we're all learning,

"What that means to me is not only do you have to know how to report and write, you have to be a wire service reporter, and blog, and you have to know how to use a video camera, you have to know how to appear before a TV camera, be on the radio," said Inquirer editor Bill Marimow. "You really have to be a maestro of the media."

He's referring to web journalism, of course. When you look at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution online, are you seeing the best use of these elements? To be truthful, I'm concerned that this push to online journalism is going to come at a great cost - of photo, video and design.

Thumbs up for Obama, thumbs down for riots

Photo courtesy of the Metro, U.K

World leaders at the G20 London Summit tackled tough questions concerning the global economy, regional wars and climate change. Despite the afternoon's gruesome agenda, President Obama took a moment before the meeting to strike a pose with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi (above middle) and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev (above right). It makes me wonder what they were saying to one another, teeth gritted while smiling. I wish politicians acted this goofy more often. I couldn't help but laugh when I saw some of the other leaders in the photo, particularly the man in the bottom left corner glaring at the camera. Does anyone know who the guy in the top right corner is? I couldn't seem to find a caption with his name.

Whoever took this photo struck gold. Not only is Dmitry Medvedev smiling, the photograph was an opportune moment that may have eased tensions between leaders, and possibly, their constituents. Today, countries such as the U.S., Italy and Russia are connected primarily through the Internet - which makes photography like this even more important.

International events, including the G20 summit, raise a larger question: are these meetings solely for the promotion of diplomatic relations, or is the meeting increasingly aimed at the media so journalists can provide transparent and cooperative impressions of global politicians to the public? In my opinion, most decisions involving international relations and diplomacy are made behind closed doors. I would argue that the topics and speeches at conferences like the G20 are well-rehearsed and are meant more for the media and public than for other establishing legitimate relations between countries. If this is the case, the public may be cheated out of authentic discourse, but at least the discussions aim to inform people about current policies that surround international issues. I'm interested to hear if anyone has any other ideas on the topic. Here are more images from the G20 conference.

On the other hand, the following CNN video shows the heavier side of the conference. As protestors gathered outside, tensions rose between the crowd and London police force. Though the majority of the protestors were peaceful, others provoked violence and quarreled with the police. As seen in the video, CNN reporter Nic Robertson and his crew were in the middle of all the action - even getting pushed around a few times. The video is an excellent example of how public events, especially involving protestors, can suddenly turn violent and dangerous. This is a consideration many journalists must make before deciding to travel to world events or entering investigative journalism.

Let's Move on... shall we?

I understand that as long as men want to look at pretty girls, girls will always be interested in fashion. As much as I love pretty clothes, I think enough is enough. I wanted to be a journalist in women's magazines not because I wanted to continue this trend of telling girls how they should behave to snab the guy, or how to wear their hair on the big night, I think as journalists we do possess the power to bring about social changes and this recent coverage of Michelle's outfits on her trip to London, doesn't make me optimistic about change.


Without being bombarded with information about the election, the inauguration, the first 100 days in office...etc, I think we've had enough coverage on Michelle Obama's fashion and style tips.

The media doesn't seem to care enough about Michelle as a person because the only coverage that people want to hear about is "what is she going to wear today?" It is getting very redundant.





However, the positive thing about our move towards visual media, is that in reporting news such as this, it is very useful. Nobody wants to read descriptions about what Michelle is wearing, we'd like to be shown with pictures so that we can track down the products or mimic them.