Bland.

Boring.

Insipid.

Soulless.

Bland.

Witless.

Lethargic.

Derivative.

Unadventurous.

Egotistical.

Bland.

Unispired.

Did I mention bland?

No doubt this will win everything in sight at the annual SND Emporer's Clothes Jamboree - but when is someone going to stand up and say enough already... Is there some kind of mission to suck the life out of newspaper design? If so, the new De Morgan is a standard bearer. BOOORING.......

You say bland as if it's a fact rather than a value judgement, chou. Care to actually explain why you believe so?

Sure ... and I'm happy to pontificate some...

In the past decade or so, newspaper designers and art directors have utilised the ever-increasing fluidity of design software combined with the improved colour reproduction of new generation presses to produce more polished, more sedate pages.

Perhaps through consensus, or (more likely, I believe) the on-going influence of a handful of so-called redesign gurus, Mario Garcia foremost among them - the result has been a homogenisation of newspaper design across the world.

More and more art directors, imho, aspire to recreating this placid, polished, sedate feel for their paper. The result, as I said above, is - again imho - bland.

THEY ALL LOOK THE SAME!

Which is okay as far as it goes, and a bit unsurprising really since they're all designed by the same people, but what I find a little disturbing is this universal Wow!! - Gee!! - Cool!! outpouring that follows precisely because it looks like the last thing that rolled off the Garcia production line.

Clearly, I have a rather polarised view on this and I'm aware that I'm going on a bit... but I only ask you to look long and hard at the new De Morgan and point to A SINGLE innovation. Just one. Just one little novelty that all the time, money and effort that went into redesigning the paper has produced.
And I'm sorry, but using two different tints of blue on one panel doesn't count.
And if finding something unique is a bit of a struggle, then isn't my point about blandness and predictability maybe not as polarised as it may sound?

Newspapers shouldn't be about 'ooh it's so nice - is that 12percent cyan or 15?' - they should be about dynamic projection of news and opinion. The 'ooh it's so nice' brigade used to be happily confined to the magazine market, but that influence - that aspiration, sadly - has spread to newspapers and we're all a lot less interesting because of it. A lot more bland.

There used to be a famous newspaper editor in the UK called Kelvin MacKenzie - editor of the tabloid The Sun (at the time the biggest selling English speaking daily on the planet) - who was fond of the maxim Shock and Amaze on Every Page. It served them very well. Can anyone point to anything vaguely shocking or amazing about the new DeMorgan et al?

Chou

I'm always skeptical of those who say, about whatever discipline, that such and such is "supposed to be about." I find it especially so in a context such as this in which DeMorgan's redesign is castigated as being "Bland, Boring, Insipid, Soulless, Bland, Witless, Lethargic, Derivative, Unadventurous, Egotistical, Bland, Uninspired. That logic seems to be at odds with itself. On one hand chou's dictum espouses what a newspaper "should be" -- such mandates always seem inherently limiting to me -- then on the other hand he accuses de morgan of being stale (my word, not his).
I, for one, like the redesign. It's hardly "bland" whatever you may think of it. I'm not even put off by the screened back color behind the text. The text appears to be adequately legible. Beautiful job! But that's coming from a "magazine" guy!

Unfair!
all I said was a newspaper should be bold, dynamic and exciting... none of which are dictums for design!
(and none of which apply to the DeMorgan redesign)...

I don't want to labour the point, so I'll shut my trap after this, but you use words like "adequate" "nice" and "beautiful" to describe the redesign .. what is this? A newspaper or a pot plant?

How about words like, er, shocking .. bold .. adventurous .. unique .. exciting .. or are my expectations too high?

Here's my summary for the DeMorgan's job: "Missed opportunity."
But of course, we're all entitled to our view. Even magazine guys...

JOKE!

"UNFAIR!" ???
Surely no less "fair" than listing a dozen negatives without any explaination.

My problem was with your choice of words "should be" and "shouldn't be." That is the kind of mindset that limits.

And really, how often do words like shocking and unique enter into the equation? And don't get me wrong, I don't say that we shouldn't aspire to higher standards or "higher expectations," but more often than not, they do not apply. We have just had on this site a major discussion about plagerism and originality and how unoriginal work can be.

One other point. The notion of shocking still being part of the discourse is rather shocking to me. I've been a painter for over 30 years. Even the fine arts have purged that silly notion years ago. Nothing's shocking! I'll presume you are speaking in a "relative" sense.

you really are a magazine guy, aren't you.
bit like the drummer in the band...

Really Emperor Chou?
Has somone dared to challenge your notions?

Remember, the drummer is usually the fittest member of the band!

It's clean and bright. Not reading the language, I can't say much about the organization of the content. But it looks nice.
Is that damning with faint praise? If the aim is to give other designers hard-ons, then perhaps it is.

But is generating shock and awe what good design is all about?
No, it's about most effectively supporting the content. People buy and read papers to get informed and entertained, not shocked or amazed or otherwise lifted from their routines (not that such an impact may not be a good thing, in some cases).

I don't think the reader cares if the design is unoriginal, if it has been done before in Florida or Mexico or anywhere else. What matters to the reader is whether the paper contains vital information and presents it in an effective, efficient and inviting manner.

Sure, everytime a redesign is posted, I quickly dive into the images, looking for the new and the fresh and the shocking. But I am not a typical reader.

Is the design good or bad? Is bold better? Ask the people who read it.

Or your don't have enough experience or guys, really, what you guys smoking now! this job is amazing, really amazing, you see the screen on the front page?. Are you juniors? or blinds or insane! really you guys are designers???

Malcolm said it well.
It's the designer, and very few others, who really care about "shocking", and "amazing" someone with their chops. Let's not get confused about the mission of a newspaper. I dare say the average reader will be very pleased with the redesign and that is who it's for, not the designer. Talk about egotistical!

You don't care about 'shoking' and 'amazing', I don't know what is your experience but you totally confused about difference between design, redesign and readers, maybe you do flyers! so amateurs!!! go back to school, no offense!!! is a JOKE

meeeYOW!!

You don't care about 'shoking' and 'amazing', I don't know what is your experience but you totally confused about difference between design, redesign and readers, every paper have different readers, European readers are differents and you have to know that, is not like we do everyday is more much more.

Well said!! ???????

Can anyone tell me what they actually like about it .. apart from er, it's "nice"...

nice? when my boss says something is nice, I go back and start again.

and no, although I am clearly not in the same league as you guys, ahem, I'm not an amateur. Just a little harder to please than Mr Tony "My GOD!! This Job is just so AMAZING!!!" Fernandez-Davila.

Um, as much as I respect your critical eye, Mr F-D, do you think pretty much everything is, like, totally amazing? Or am I being unfair.

A tangentally related thought:
I don't know how many years old the old design is, but is that a "Hot L" I see? Seems like De Morgan has ditched the trend that's sweeping the U.S. Get ahead of the curve, folks. Skip the "Hot L" redesign you're planning. If there ever was a sign that American papers are behind the rest of the world design-wise, this is it. Of course I'm only half-joking.

please, what's a hot l?

Nicole, I noticed the "Hot L" on the old paper as well. Of course, when you do the Hot L on a broadsheet, you're left with... well, a Berliner, pretty much.

Maybe it's all part of an insdious plot...

Wonderfully sophisticated. Energetic. Tonally precise.
A thing of great beauty.

I'm agree with Scot you don't need to be so specific because we don't know, the market, the readers, we have to be more open, Mr C H O U and my name is Mr F-D, you are funny guys! but I like that! is amazing!! nah!!

I can’t read german... so my focus is only on what catches my eye... I like it! at least on screen, but I need to see a printed edition. Those full page screens could be a nightmare...

Yeah you right, sometime you have to choose the perfect percent of the screen I ussually use 10 to 12% screen and 15 in newsprint, because newsprint 30lbs take a little more ink.
Is hard to do something different and Europe have a different style and special colors, like Le Monde, or Liberation (black and red) is totally different redesign New York Times and redesign Le Monde (different life, different market, different readers. Is simple like that...

beautiful

Well, sorry guys, but I throw my hat in with Chou.
At least most of the way.
pretty dull if you ask me...

Is no enough be smart designer, have a good eye is fair enough plus your talent, this DeMorgan is different and "the different is good", they play very well with screens, and solids, the european elegance is impress and is easy for read at the more important the readers already love this paper!.
Mr F-D

All your base are belong to us.

J. Tony, I'm a little confused -- What are your credentials for knowing that readers already love this paper? With the exception of Jumping Shark, I haven't seen a lot of it.

As far as what I can tell from the redesign, it looks more refined, which is always a positive thing. Those screens are worrisome, but with the waterless printing it probably isn't nearly the issue. I hope that the color is used with an understanding of its importance (which I'm sure it will be).

One of the things that I hope more papers do (and I agree in part with Chou on this) is that there is a sense of individuality with papers. Despite similar design trends (such as the Hot L and color section flags et cetera), I feel that papers for the large part have found their unique touch, and I hope that more gain that in opposition to what could be another dozen Garcia jobs that have the exact same look and feel. I think Lucie Lacava for one does a good job of the whole similar elements but individual feel thing.

Because I know very well Mario Garcia, each designer have style, you have? maybe not, Lacava, Robb, Ron even me.
my credentials? is a joke? or not
Only is my opinion, if you don't like it right.
Finally the readers already love this job!!
One friend coming from Europe yesterday, and he see the reactions. I have many years like art director and now design and redesign and I have my own style, like everybody else include Mario Garcia, Robb Montgomery, Ron Reason, Lacava, etc or not! we have to respect this experience or not!!!
maybe you not!

Nic???

To all: it's De MorgEn (not De MorgAn as everyone here writes). It's Dutch (not German, Alex)and it means The Morning.

To Nic: J. Tony is quite right on the matter that its readers already love the redesign. I'm a subscriber of De Morgen myself for ten years now, and I experience this redesign as a big improvement. Many other subcribers feel the same as I do, as I can tell from the readers letters in De Morgen and on the paper's website (www.demorgen.be).

"so amateurs!!! go back to school, no offense!!! is a JOKE"

http://www.newspagedesigner.com/portfolios/portfolio1.php?UserID=8653

What's a joke?

Read more, post less.

My apologies if you were feeling offended by the credentials comment, J. Tony -- I just was wondering where else the buzz has been, and I may have rushed judgement in that. Jurgen, thanks for the information.

And the point I was trying to make was not about experience with design and redesign -- it's knowing the community the newspaper is being produced for, and in my understanding the DeMorgen redesign appears to do that.

Also, I thought an insult about my not having a design style was unnecessary. But I guess I'm not helping kill the flames. (Note to self & all: keep it civil, and sorry if I haven't been good about it.)

Tell it like it is Jurgen!It's quite remarkable that everybody is analysing the design, without ever noticing they are missspelling the name of the newspaper. They must have putting a lot of thought in their analysis. And I don't think it's fair to judge the newspaper from some tiny screendumps either. How can you compare that with the physical paper?
I DO think that the redesign is a succesful one. And yes, i HAVE read the paper...