Permit me this journalism-geek digression, but I'm a little worried about the Chicago Tribune redesign debuting next week.
I'm really not concerned about theater coverage in the redesign—given that new editor Gerould Kern repeatedly invokes Chris Jones's name, along with Michael Phillips, Greg Kot, Maureen Ryan, et al., in this redesign preview package, I'm sticking with the Mary Sunshine view that theater will continue to get the same amount of real estate it has now. (There's more on the redesign at Crain's.)
No, as an unrepentant journalism geek, I'm more worried about the front page.
There's nothing wrong per se with larger graphics and more charticles on the front page. If that can catch more commuter eyes and get folks to cough up the fifty cents for a full newspaper as opposed to the free RedEye, I'm all for it.
But with RedEye founding editor Jane Hirt on board as the new managing editor of the paper of record, I'm feeling some trepidation. I'm certainly guilty of accepting the RedEye from the forceful distributor at my Red Line station, because, hey, free crossword! But I take issue with that "paper's" priorities, as evidenced by this tweet a few weeks ago. The morning after John McCain's speech at the RNC, days after Gustav hit the Gulf Coast, and with all sorts of other actual news in the cycle, the RedEye cover story was that Brad Pitt, Shia LeBeouf and some other attractive white male actors had movies opening in the next couple of months!
The Trib has already been criticized in the past week for its reporters getting mired in he said/he said without providing context. Hopefully the new emphasis on style won't exacerbate that problem.
It looks like USA Today. Ewww.
Posted by: Marisa Wegrzyn | September 23, 2008 at 07:36 AM
Honestly, the redesign is just a symptom of the continuing deterioration of the news media, and as such it barely registers as shock for me. It's not news, remember, it's entertainment, and it only has to be entertainment because it's business.
Posted by: Bilal | September 23, 2008 at 09:08 AM
Um, last I checked the Trib increased their paper to seventy-five cents. I don't know why they think they're 25 cents better than the Sun-Times. Maybe they brought their price back down now that they're using less paper.
What are Chicago papers good for anyway (to me)?
1. Sports
1a. Theatre reviews/local arts
3. The latest local political outrage/malfeasance
Everything else, national news and the like, I get online.
Posted by: Ryan | September 23, 2008 at 11:09 AM
Ryan: That goes to show how long it's been since I bought a Trib. I read it every day online, but in truth I rarely see a hard copy.
Posted by: Kris Vire | September 23, 2008 at 09:07 PM