SI redesign

[I Digress]

Wow. Anyone get this? I'm curious what you think. Let me say at the top that I am never a fan of magazine redesigns because they usually make the product look more like advertising. But what SI has done is far worse, IMHO. The editor says they're using a 'cleaner' type face. Looks to me that it's a pretty standard Times Roman, but somewhat condensed, which makes it harder to read especially the front of the book where the columns are narrow. They've liberally mixed in san serif fonts, in subheads especially... ALL IN RED.....Red everywhere? So, SI, in the red?

Bottom line. I have two more payments left to complete my next three-year extension on my subscription and I was delivered a magazine today that actually made my eyes hurt.

[Small Town Guy]

Ooooh, look forward to getting it today. Here's the editor's note.

http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1154761/index.htm

[Boom_70]

Ooooh, look forward to getting it today. Here's the editor's note.

http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1154761/index.htm

Have not seen yet but this jumped out at me in editiors note:

"locators designed to help readers navigate SI more easily"

It was a eureka moment for me. Thought-- dam 45 years of reading SI and finally someone decides to put locators.

[ringer]

The SI makeover is awful. It says the intention is to add "more nuanced and incisive journalism within the largest possible context of sports" but the reality is:

(1) meaningless graphics now take up far too much space
(2) three pages devoted to recycling pieces from the vault  (Re-printing articles is journalism?) Waste of space, imo.
(3) another book excerpt - another great way to underutilize your staff
(4) "largest possible context of sports" means reducing the Boston Marathon to a scorecard nugget?  That's just one example of a missed opportunity.

Basically, SI got Botox.

[ringer]

...and another thing....

The heds and subheds take up 1/2 page. 
Welcome to the 150-point font.   

[jlee]

(2) three pages devoted to recycling pieces from the vault  (Re-printing articles is journalism?) Waste of space, imo.

Not only does it take up space for relevant stories, it reminds you of how good SI used to be. (See, no typos!) It's a double-whammy.

[playthrough]

Yeah, I like the old stuff from the Vault as much as any other sports junkie, but the journalist in me said "there's a cover-up for one less expense, er, article, every week."

[WaylonJennings]

I'm sure staff writer Jeff Pearlman is happy to see someone else's Roger Clemens book excerpted!

[playthrough]

Pearlman talked about the excerpt on his BLOG!, but was mum on why that was in SI instead of his.

[WaylonJennings]

His Clemens book, at least the 100 pages I've read so far, is really good. He's not an investigative reporter, obviously, but his biographies and season narratives are just easy, deeply reported reads.

[DanOregon]

I liked the brief vault exerpts when they were relevant to something going on now. I've noticed SI now can be read cover to cover in two gym visits, when it used to take three. Still a good mag, but their "big" features are now rarely more than six pages.

[Boom_70]

I liked the brief vault exerpts when they were relevant to something going on now. I've noticed SI now can be read cover to cover in two gym visits, when it used to take three. Still a good mag, but their "big" features are now rarely more than six pages.

2 gym visits - geez you must be a slow reader. For me I'm done after one visit to the reading room. In past few months if SI had not been putting in the special golf section that I did not order, I would be through it even faster.

[TheSportsPredictor]

Ooooh, look forward to getting it today. Here's the editor's note.

http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1154761/index.htm

Have not seen yet but this jumped out at me in editiors note:

"locators designed to help readers navigate SI more easily"

It was a eureka moment for me. Thought-- dam 45 years of reading SI and finally someone decides to put locators.

Do they have arrows pointing to the corner of the page so people know where to grab on before turning?

[Pete Incaviglia]

I liked the brief vault exerpts when they were relevant to something going on now. I've noticed SI now can be read cover to cover in two gym visits, when it used to take three. Still a good mag, but their "big" features are now rarely more than six pages.

For me I'm done after one visit to the reading room.

Me too. It's not what it used to be.

[mediaguy]

I'm used to flipping straight to the back for the "inside" sections. Now they'll just trot out Sidd Finch there or some other "classic" stories. Nothing like making a selling point out of the fact that your best work appeared 20 years ago ...

[DanOregon]

So what's the page count this week?

[clutchcargo]

Does this redesign and newly-nuanced coverage mean they have finally done away with having writers insert themselves into their own stories? I'm all for that!

[buckweaver]

I liked the brief vault exerpts when they were relevant to something going on now. I've noticed SI now can be read cover to cover in two gym visits, when it used to take three. Still a good mag, but their "big" features are now rarely more than six pages.

For me I'm done after one visit to the reading room.

Me too. It's not what it used to be.

Same here. I often start flipping through it while standing in the kitchen and read the whole damn thing before my legs get tired. Used to always have to go sit down, since I knew it'd take me a while to get through the rest of it.

[Boom_70]

I like that they have eliminated a lot of ads. It's easier to get to the stories without the clutter.

[MidwestSportsGuy]

Not only does it take up space for relevant stories, it reminds you of how good SI used to be. (See, no typos!) It's a double-whammy.

My local paper, which has dramatically sliced its news hole in the past year, does this twice weekly ... once in sports and once in the local section. Always drives me nuts that half a page (at minimum) is dedicated to reprinting a story from 20 years ago, and the reprint typically has no correlation with a current event. So, in sports for example, what used to be a six- or eight-page section is now two, and half a page is dedicated once a week to some cross country race recap and oversized photo from 1979. Fantastic.

Why do some editors suck so bad? 

[slappy4428]

It takes less time to read than my local paper... did Golf Plus get cut out altogether and I've missed it?

[playthrough]

Golf Plus was in my SI.

[slappy4428]

Golf Plus was in my SI.

Well fuckity fuck fuck fuck.

EDIT: I tried signing up for it again; message said I was currently receiving Fantasy Plus. Did spnited hear the scream from where he is?

[mediaguy]

One thing that hasn't changed: Nebulous corrections. This week's clarifies that a quote attributed to an ESPN VP wasn't from him, noting that nobody from ESPN would comment for the story. OK, so who said it? Somebody had to, right?

Somebody at SI got some research that red type really pops out, and that guy has some pull.

I like that the editor claims the most "obvious" change is that "Leading Off" -- patently lifted from ESPN The Mag -- is going from three two-page photos to four. Wow, that radical change just blew me away ...

[goalmouth]

Nothing new here. Red and black have quickly become shopworn magazine redesign cliches over the past 10 years thanks to consultant Roger Black.