I don't think it looks like the Tribune at all! What's this guy thinking? I still like it.

Insanely stupid blog entry from the Washington Monthly guy who 1) assumes it's coming from a consultant (wrong: it was done in-house) and 2) there was some mandate from corporate (wrong: this was a process started by their editors several years ago).

I mean, wow, is that an insanely wrong piece of writing.

And now what ? What is the editorial message that the team is sending to the customers ? I don't see anything new. Someone still really think that the food is going to be better because the package has been redesigned ? What about the taste ? Isn't a good design one that is showing a new editorial strategy ?

Apparently someone didn't like the redesign...
LOS ANGELES (CNS) - A suspicious envelope containing white powder was found tonight at the Los Angeles Times building, authorities said.

fear not, friends. we got this from our exec night editor at about 10:15PDT:

We are all clear. The substance has been identified as Arabinic Acid, a natural product derived from the cherry tree and used as an additive in chewing gum. It came in an envelope addressed to the editor. The letter inside was half handwritten and half typed. A whack job. No specific threat. A rambling rant. Thank you all for your calm professionalism.

but, y'know, with the redesign and readers' reactions, ANYTHING is possible...

Looks lovely, if a bit deck-weary in places, with possibly too much contrast in the type there. But the conception is nice. The up-and-down heds are, of course, fantastic. I know editors who think that a hedline looks less important if it is not with all words starting out in caps...mind boggling. Congrats to all. The rules work nicely. Changing the page for the weekend days works well. Nice job. SHould be fun to work with.

It's incremental, not revolutionary. I put some potentially controversial thoughts about this and the St. Pete redesign here:

http://smallinitiatives.com/2006/10/24/raise-bar-for-newspaper-design-investments/

Sorry for the shameless plug, but the post is too long and linky to repeat here.

An in-house design? I was under the impression that the redesign was done by Danilo/Black:

http://www.rogerblack.com/global/img/posts/lisbon_presentation.pdf

That looks like a presentation about type. For the LA portion, it focuses specifically on the redrawn Kis.

It is a presentation on type, featuring the redrawn Kis. But if you look on page 28 you'll see the all of the Times' new A1 typography, as presented in Lisbon last month.
Only to suggest that Roger Black did the redesign.
Don't know for sure.

Scot you are both right and wrong.

Roger, along with Joseph Hutchinson, was instrumental in developing the type and design for the 2002 redesign of the features sections of the LAT.

A lot of the typography and many of the design concepts for the new a-section are evolutions of the features section redesign. It's the same body copy, same main headline font, etc.

But the news models were all built in-house by Joe, and many of the models addressed things that never come up in a features section. We also created a lot of new styles for nuts and bolts things like bylines, decks, etc. So this redesign work was done here on Spring Street.

There is no doubt Roger had an influence and he gave us feedback along the way.

Hope that clears this up.

mw

Thanks Michael. That does clear it up.
I'd read Roger's Libson presentation a few weeks back, so when I picked up my new paper for the first time I assumed the changes were his. My bad.
Congratulations on the redesign.
It looks good.
Cheers,
Scot

Really?, I don't think so, 4 types, is not from Roger, look like 19 Century newspaper, too classic, too confused in fonts, really I don't think so...

IT LOOKS LIKE THE HOUSTON CHRONICLE!!