Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Drunk (Fourth in a Series) | Romney Angry About Mormon Ques... »

Monday, August 6, 2007

The New New York Times

posted by on August 6 at 9:34 AM

I see a lot of blue bags on lawns and porches on my way to work every morning, so lots of people in Seattle no doubt have opinions about today’s New York Times. With this morning’s issue our only national newspaper—well, now that Weekly World News has ceased publication—got significantly narrower. From the front page…

Starting today, The Times is reducing the width of its pages by an inch and half, to the national newspaper 12-inch standard…. Slight modifications in design preserve the look and texture of The Times, with all existing features and sections and somewhat fewer words per page.

The designers at the New York Times did a great job—I hardly noticed the difference when I read through the A section at Victrola this morning. Until I got to the op-ed pages. The loss of a full column of letters is a pretty glaring alteration, and makes the Times’ editorial column seem louder, more dominant somehow. And the opinion page opposite the editorials and letters seems… oh, I dunno… less like a destination. But the overall impact of the change is much less distracting than I feared it would be. Hell, yesterday I thought I might dislike the change so much I would drop my subscription to the print edition and just read the New York Times online, like everybody else. But now I think I’ll keep those blue bags coming.

Oh, and speaking of redesigns… The Stranger is being redesigned right freaking now. We’ll have all the same content and columns that you’ve come to love and/or hate over the years, but in a new and much more confusing configuration.

RSS icon Comments


I can't wait!

Posted by Will from HA | August 6, 2007 9:49 AM

My household was anxious about the NYT down-sizing this morning as well, but we weren't about to make any judgments since our thinner paper never even arrived. The missing column in the opinions section is sure to be a disappointment.

I don't know, NYT. In the past week you've increased your price, reduced your size, and missed several deliveries. This isn't a very good way to keep a dying business alive.

Posted by mary-kate | August 6, 2007 10:00 AM

Does this mean we can still have room for those shitty comics on the last page aaaannnd the brilliance that is Sir Adrian! Ryan?! (Who has been cast out for no apparent reason.)

Does this mean I can now read Savage Love without wondering if people walking by think I'm looking for anonymous sex in a free local rag?

Posted by Mr. Poe | August 6, 2007 10:01 AM

I noticed that this morning when I was reading the NYT. Totally love the new look and it is easier to read on the bus as well. YEAH!!! ((dancing on the bus!))

Posted by Cato the Younger Younger | August 6, 2007 10:03 AM

There's a print edition? live and learn.

Posted by The Peanut Gallery | August 6, 2007 10:17 AM

I would like the Stranger to be Reader's Digest size in order to make it easier to read in the can.

Posted by elswinger | August 6, 2007 10:19 AM

5: I hope you are joking. While that isn't funny, if you are serious, that is the stupidest shit I have ever heard.

Posted by Audrey | August 6, 2007 11:01 AM

Of course The Peanut Gallery is joking. Are you a retard?

Posted by Catman | August 6, 2007 11:57 AM

I hate change.

Posted by Michigan Matt | August 6, 2007 12:26 PM

Any date set on the launch of the new Stranger design?

Posted by Bran | August 6, 2007 12:40 PM

People still read newspapers? What a waste of paper.

Posted by Ryan | August 6, 2007 1:50 PM

it wasn't clear if he was joking, because it was not funny. not even remotely charming. just stupid either way. i think you are retarded. the end.

Posted by audrey | August 6, 2007 2:27 PM

@3 - i had to agree with Mr. Poe about that last one. Sometimes, frankly, I'd rather not have to spend 3 minutes flipping thru "adult" ads to get to my favorite sections.

Posted by Will in Seattle | August 6, 2007 2:52 PM

Audrey @12:

it wasn't clear if he was joking

I wish you were joking.  That's almost as clueless as you suspect The Peanut Gallery @5 of being.

Posted by lostboy | August 6, 2007 3:29 PM

Yes, some us still read the paper. I NEED the paper. I think I get something delicious from the ink that wiggles it's way through the tips of my fingers into my boodstream. It's best served with lots of coffee.

It felt weird to me, like a novelty NY Times as opposed to the real thing.

Posted by Soo | August 6, 2007 4:55 PM

If you would follow 6's suggestion, and also add a hole in the corner to hang it by, like the Farmer's Almanac, and then print the thing on toilet paper, it could serve a dual function.

Posted by Fnarf | August 6, 2007 5:17 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).