1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

SI redesign

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by I Digress, Apr 22, 2009.

  1. I Digress

    I Digress Guest

    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.
  2. Small Town Guy

    Small Town Guy Well-Known Member

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

  3. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    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.
  4. ringer

    ringer Active Member

    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.
  5. ringer

    ringer Active Member

    ...and another thing....

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

    jlee Well-Known Member

    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.
  7. playthrough

    playthrough Moderator Staff Member

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

    playthrough Moderator Staff Member

    Pearlman talked about the excerpt on his BLOG!, but was mum on why that was in SI instead of his.
  10. 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.
  11. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

    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.
  12. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    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.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page