Today's NYTimes sports front

To the average reader, it looks like 3/4s of their sports page didn't get printed.

 

Was there an editor's note? If the story had been placed anywhere but across the fold, I think readers could have thought it was a snafu. I think it probably drew people in, and when they saw the bank area at the bottom, they probably figured it out.

 

Didn't they also do it with the Transactions entry when LeBron went back to the Cavs?

 

Being pretentious and douchey isn't exactly a novelty act for the Times.

 

Seems to me the point, when the NYT does this, is that no other (sports) story matters. And that's an interesting take, considering the subject matter.

But couldn't they do that in other ways, too? Put it on A1? Or at least include art? I know there's some shock value here, and it probably caused a lot of people to read the story who might have skipped over it otherwise. Notice it was also written in a way to take you all the way to the end of the story (kind of gimmicky, too, no?).

I read the story online, and it was accompanied with good art, including a photo gallery, and, at least at the time I looked at it, wasn't given that kind of treatment on the website.

Another question: Has the NYT ever done anything like this in any other section?

 

If the story really mattered, they should have put some effort into its presentation. To the average reader, they might as well write "This doesn't matter" in the headline.

 

Absolutely. Especially if the art is as good as you say it is. And, by the way, that headline blows, too.

This is an infinitely better example of how to present the only sports story that matters on a given day:

 

Now dump the photos and just run the hed and the text block. Fabulous!

 

Solid. Damn solid.

 

Can someone explain the New York Times front to me? I understood the LeBron transaction and the Hall of Fame fronts. But I'm not getting this at all. What's the tie-in from the story to an empty front page like that?