Morbid curiosity

Tim Lawson · **Posted:** Fri Jul 23, 2004 4:29 pm

It's posted on Romenesko that the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, unfathomably, is going to go with an all-reefer (or something) front page on Mondays. No stories on the front. I have no idea how a broadsheet could do this. Does anyone know if there are any prototypes floating around? I don't want to wait until mid-August to see this monstrosity. P.S. My condolences to the A1 designer there.

Matthew Grieco · **Posted:** Fri Jul 23, 2004 4:47 pm

Well, nothing ever happens on Sundays. Any wire editor knows that.

EMorse · **Posted:** Fri Jul 23, 2004 5:17 pm

I'd just gotten over my horror at the no-stories-on-A1 revelation when I noticed this bit of the memo:We will create a series of workshops that gives staff members tips on producing error-free copy. The workshops would be tailored to particular disciplines; reporters/editors, photographers, graphic artists/page designers and copy editors.And I'm absolutely certain that among those tips will be:
* Reporters: ALWAYS write to assigned length and double-check any facts you include in your stories. And oh yeah, "cq" means you've checked something out and it's absolutely correct.
* Editors: Hold your reporters to length and to copy deadlines.
* Page designers: When a late story is going in multiple suburban zones, keep the layouts identical or nearly identical, so the copy editors don't have to write six entirely new sets of display type on deadline.

jjmoney62 · **Posted:** Fri Jul 23, 2004 5:19 pm

The Rocky and the Denver Post do a broadsheet billboard on the weekends, I believe.

ToddJBehme · **Posted:** Fri Jul 23, 2004 5:22 pm

I think the Rockford (Ill.) Register Star, where I once worked, now does essentially that all the time. I don't think there's ever more than a few inches of body copy with any one element on the front page.

drew4au · **Posted:** Fri Jul 23, 2004 8:41 pm

Don't really know what the difference will be. Startlegram only manages to get about 2 inches on the cover for each story with the current design. Seems to me they could do a lot better getting more information into those couple of inches. (I work for the Competition to the East, by the way, so I don't know any details.)[ July 23, 2004: Message edited by: Drew4AU ]

redpenman · **Joined:** Fri Jul 23, 2004 12:01 am **Posts:** 65

Our paper just went to a new Sunday front. We're not running teasers, but we ditched jumps and try to get nine or 10 elements out there with plenty of art.
It's going along well enough, but we've had some planning problems that we've had to iron out.Hadn't heard that about Fort Worth. Should be an adventure.[ July 23, 2004: Message edited by: redpenman ]

nstockdale · **Posted:** Fri Jul 23, 2004 11:38 pm

But what do you all think about the merits of the idea? I can see where it would make sense for rack sales. But I'm having trouble seeing what time it really saves readers. Pressed for time, I'd much rather have the five most important stories on the front page waiting for me than have to go searching for them once I've deemed them important. And are you really that much busier on Monday morns than on any other weekday? Enough to merit a redesigned front page?

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Fri Jul 23, 2004 11:46 pm

I'm not John F. Morton, but it seems like a poor idea to me. Newspapers lose circulation because of conscious efforts to go after a prized demographic.[ July 24, 2004: Message edited by: blanp ]

redpenman · **Joined:** Fri Jul 23, 2004 12:01 am **Posts:** 65

Our editors cling to the notion that "readers don't follow jumps." I believe our EIC would eliminate jumps from the front page seven days a week if he thought we'd get away with it.My stance is similar to that stated above: If you've built a faithful readership, why go tinkering with things and get the subscribers that have been with you for years thinking a huge change is on the way --- especially if they have a negative reaction to it. People just want the news. I think all these fancy fronts and gimmicks just hinder getting to it. The papers need to ask themselves, "Are we doing this to help our readers or pad our egos?"

jjmoney62 · **Posted:** Sat Jul 24, 2004 5:26 am

I think it can work well with a tabloid but looks horrid in a broadsheet.

Oeditpus Rex · **Posted:** Sat Jul 24, 2004 12:20 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by redpenman:
The papers need to ask themselves, "Are we doing this to help our readers or pad our egos?"<hr></blockquote>I think a large part of it is to say, in effect, "We're changing; we're progressive. We're hip, we're now, we're happening!" But, if so, who wants this? Maybe I'm a dinosaur, but I'm of the opinion that readers want something they're comfortable with.

contrarysounding · **Posted:** Mon Jul 26, 2004 5:25 pm

Look here.

Lee · **Posted:** Mon Jul 26, 2004 6:10 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Tim Lawson:
an all-reefer front page<hr></blockquote>
Is that legal?

ndugan1 · **Posted:** Mon Jul 26, 2004 10:49 pm

From what I've gleaned here, most of the people I've talked to are of the opinion that it's not done so much to be "cutting edge," but rather because, well, nothing happens on Sundays (I realize this is a big generalization and it might well be disproven this coming Sunday). I work Sundays, and I can't think of one where we've had too many stories to get in to our pages. Today, for instancen -- a Monday -- we are running 8-page sections, the smallest we go and something we haven't done in quite some time. But dammit, nothing happened today -- the big news is tonight, and the convention can only take up so much room.I think the problem here arises from not wanting to deal with working in stories from the wire about losing Sunday as a day of the weekend and other pointless efforts written because nothing else was going on. This is just the next step, and I don't like it. All it does is encourage reader's behavior of looking at display type, deciding on those 8 words whether to read the story, and moving on. This is just more fuel for that attitude.

paulwiggins · **Posted:** Mon Jul 26, 2004 11:42 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Lee:

Is that legal?<hr></blockquote>
Was compulsory when I was at uni doing the front page for the students association handbook, One suspects one inhaled but one's rrecollection is diplomatically vague.

Powderhorn · **Posted:** Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:08 am

On a broadsheet, this clearly qualifies as refer madness.

bcubbison · **Posted:** Tue Jul 27, 2004 7:33 pm

There's nothing that makes sense about
A-2
A-3
A-4
A-5
A-6
A-7
A-8
A-9
A-10
A-11
clicking 10 more times to get the rest of the sentence. Then, going back
A-10
A-9
A-8
A-7
A-6
A-5
A-4
A-3
A-2
A-1
to start another story. The trouble with the countermeasures, and I've tried them, is that they cause problems of their own. But choosing one way to give people the news, traditional or radical, but only one, is going to be a thing of the past. Maybe a traditional A-1 with a half-wrap that's all promos will create two channels for delivering the news for different kinds of readers. Maybe that's just as goofy. One thing's for sure. Fort Worth is going to need some strong headline writing.

paulwiggins · **Posted:** Tue Jul 27, 2004 7:40 pm

But not for long methinks. This rates up there with a bold but unwise move our group once made that was later described as to readers a ''less than succesful experiment''[ July 27, 2004: Message edited by: Paul Wiggins ]

Testy Copy Editors

Morbid curiosity

Who is online

What They're Saying

Useful Links