This morning's front page; click on the image for a bigger view. The nation's sports-centric daily offers a Summer Olympics analysis today, as the opening ceremonies launch the biggest sports event of the year. "China will win the gold medal count at the Beijing Olympics, with 51 golds to the Unites States' 43, while the USA is likely to retain a slight edge in the overall medal count, 104-97,'' reporter Vicki Michaelis predicts. "If the predictions hold, it will mark the first time in 72 years that a country besides the USA or Soviet Union claims the most gold medals at a Summer Games.''[Image: Newseum]
USA TODAY is no longer legit. I'd take everything written in that paper (and web site) with a grain of salt. Merger insanity has drained resources and sent many real journalists running for the door...and has turned the national daily into just another shallow rag, completely driven by the bottom line. The web site is even more shallow with its silly quizzes and tricks to get you to click, click, click. Annoying ads everywhere. Wasn't the "brand" built on the idea of not frustrating the reader to death with story jumps and cluttered ads everywhere? It seems like the web folks are taking the opposite approach. As soon as the public realizes it's being manipulated and not really informed, the web site will diminish. Unfortunately, by then, the paper will be a shell of its former self. Of course, we live in an American Idol world now, so perhaps goofy quizzes and dumb videos is what the public wants from the media. If so, the people running the site (and now the newspaper to a large degree) are well equipped to deliver.
ReplyDeleteIs USA Today going retro? The look of the front page looks like the 80's version. What happened to its style that defined the paper?
ReplyDelete@8:47 am: Bear in mind that principal USA Today designer J. Ford Huffman was among 43 news staffers who took buyouts in December. Last I heard, he was working at The Washington Post -- an example of the folly of Publisher Craig Moon's budget cuts. The Post can afford one of GCI's best designers -- but Gannett can't? See this post on Huffman: http://tinyurl.com/5ga53v
ReplyDeleteI know. I just wanted to point out the folly, for those who weren't aware.
ReplyDelete