Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Montgomery | Advertiser latest to unveil new look

Alabama's Montgomery Advertiser today joined most of the other 79 U.S. community newspapers in a redesign that includes a uniform typeface across all dailies as part of the five production hubs now under development. Executive Editor Wanda Lloyd previewed the change in a column for readers on Sunday.

The Advertiser's circulation: Monday to Saturday, 33,189; Sunday, 42,870, according to ABC figures at Sept. 30.

Earlier: Say hello to your new, uniform typeface.

Got a Gannett front page to recommend? Find it in the Newseum's page one database, then post a link in the comments section, below. To e-mail confidentially, write jimhopkins[at]gmail[dot-com]; see Tipsters Anonymous Policy in the rail, upper right.

[Image: Newseum]


  1. This is the AFTER look of the redesign? Really?

    Wonder what it looked like before.

    This front is not bad, but of course, is painfully MOR - Middle of the Road. Nothing cool or unique or even remotely community related.

    But sadly, this is what Gannett strives for - bland uniformity

  2. Ample proof that editors will say/write anything and put a bow on it - while jettisoning staff - to cling to their own jobs and standard of living.

  3. We changed fonts as part of the Universal change...yuk! While most people don't like change, I have heard negative comments from the public. People complain that the fonts make it harder to read, especially senior citizens (who make up the vast majority of our readers). I understand why corporate is doing this - it will be easier to lay off more people as the ciruculation continues to drop.

    When will community papers go to a standardize USA Living section? Or USA Food section? Or USA Comic page? Or USA Editorial page? I know there coming, but when?

  4. Yup, MOR. And what is up with the lead font? Yuck.

  5. Actually, I kind of like it.

  6. You've got rules (lines for the whippersnappers) all over the page, would it have killed someone to throw one between the ad and the type resembling editorial copy above it?

    With no border on the ad it blends right in - nothing crisp about that.

    Overall an incredibly beige page. And is that a gray bar or a landing strip on the bottom? No reason that has to be that huge, the hole on the X-rite is only an eighth inch.

  7. This gets top play on 1a? Must be an extremely slow news day.

  8. The old masthead was classier. This one looks generic. That's the point, I suppose.

  9. Has a redesign ever been recorded in actually raising circulation? That is, beyond the special subscription deals and whatnot associated with a relaunch?

    If the good folks in Montgomery would tackle that, I'd be more than interested.

  10. A couple of things:

    1) Didn't Gannett give each paper 12 typeface options from which to select?

    2) There have been sooooooooo many readability studies done on body text. Why didn't Gannett just buy a really good typeface for body text and mandate that every paper use that typeface with a certain size/leading/kerning for body text?

    3) A few of the people who are going to be leading the design side of these pagination centers aren't exactly known for generic design. Tim Frank who is going to be stationed at the hub in Jersey comes to mind. He quite the risk-taker with design. There are a couple others like him leading the other hubs, I wonder how Gannett will keep the design minimal -- if that is indeed the goal?

  11. I find it disingenuous to tell the readers our redesigns are done with them in mind. BS. The homogenization of our pages now is for one reason -- the warehouse work that will be done at the five hubs.

    Also, is it the Montgomery Biscuits or Biscuit? I see it both ways in the blurb on the left rail.

  12. The image Jim is using, which was lifted from the Newseum site, has blown out/defaulted on the lead headline font. In real life, it is much bolder.

  13. amazing that not one person on this post likes it. Are you all ahters? What is your problem?

  14. Way to paint with a big brush, 5:18. I posted at 2:03 and nowhere did I mention I didn't like the redesign. I don't like the sham way it's being presented to paying readers.

    Newspapers used to ferret out the truth; now we can't even tell it ourselves.

  15. Defaulted type on today's front page today, too. Seriously ... they haven't noticed and can't/won't fix?

  16. This redesign is so 1998.


Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.