Comments on: Orlando Sentinel redesign debuts

By: kamini

kamini — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 06:11:18 +0000

good

By: Ken Carpenter

Ken Carpenter — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 23:30:43 +0000

It’s Day 2 of the redesigned Orlando Sentinel, and to paraphrase Pete Townshend in “Won’t Get Fooled Again” — meet the new paper . . . same as the old paper.

Newspaper owners, and some editors, like to change the look of the product when it doesn’t sell well. That strategy rarely, if ever, adds readers or revenues. It might work for car manufacturers or soda bottlers — have you seen Sierra Mist Undercover Orange? “It’s orange, but it’s clear!” — but not newspapers.

When I asked a good friend, a TV reporter based in Orlando, if he had seen the Sentinel’s redesign, he said, “No . . . is the journalism any better?”

Read the full story here

By: Joelle Keene

Joelle Keene — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 18:25:11 +0000

How was this arrived at? Where in this redesign is there room for more than a sound bite’s information on any subject? Graphics are great and can draw the reader in, but what are they drawing the reader in to? Is there any content outside the Opinion page that is more than 150 words long?
If you give only what’s on TV, what’s the point of a newspaper? Most people read newspapers so they can get more detailed information on things.

By: Ken Carpenter

Ken Carpenter — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 19:01:48 +0000

Here are my impressions, after picking up the paper in my driveway this morning:

http://kencarpenter.com