Yes, this post is a bit delayed, but now that I’m on a flight home to Cali, I finally have a moment to finish it.

My BCNI experience finished with a bang thanks to Major Highfield‘s roundtable discussion on news site design and mobile news design. For those of you who don’t know Major, the former newsie is now the mobile tech lead for ING Direct. His roundtable was an open discussion about what works and what doesn’t in current news design, and a look forward at new ideas and trends.

He identified the following most common types of design we see in news:

Column Design (NYT)

Very reminiscent of print design, “column”-based news sites have thin vertical modules. The most well-known example is the New York Times.

Grid view (CNN)

The grid news design has less emphasis on hierarchy and gives equal balance to story display. Although Major used CNN as the example, I’ve included Newser as a more ideal example of the grid layout.

Buckets (MSNBC)

Bucket designs group stories by topic beneath a main header.

Lists (Digg)

Timeline view or “river” view are also common terms for a list layout which is as it sounds: A list of headlines, like Digg.

Combo package (Toronto Star)

The Toronto Star combines these different possibilities by offering the user different modes of viewing news, although Major noted that this isn’t ideal UI. The Toronoto Star manages multiple layouts from which the users can choose their favorite:

Major said you should push out the best user experience and not force the user to choose. Based on the heavy emphasis the Star’s designers put on evidence-based design, I’d venture to guess that they’re collecting data about which display is used most often in preparation for something radical. But that’s just a guess.

Combining advertising with editorial design

Traditionally, display ads thrown into random columns and headers of news sites was the preferred advertising style online, as adapted from a print model. The new type of advertising comes in the form of embedded ads (i.e. ads displayed inline with the rest of the editorial content). We see this manifesting in LA Times’ decision to sell keyword ads within articles this week. A bad example of this can also be seen on CNN.com:

A good example of embedded advertising is in the free desktop version of Tweetie:

I think the reason CNN’s embedded ads fail is because CNN isn’t being honest with its customers. Tweetie clearly labels its ads as such and implements them elegantly into the design of the app. It also helps that the ads are very targeted at the user. CNN’s embedded ads try to look like editorial content and it’s deceitful. They’re also not very useful or pretty.

Takeaways

So the point of all this is that news sites still suck. One nugget that really stood out was in our conversation about news site navigation. We still categorize stories under sports, arts, news, opinion, etc. because this is how the print product was laid out. But is that what’s relevant to readers? I know that when I browse news, I don’t care about the topic. I care about the timeliness and its relevance to me, no matter what “section” it falls within. I don’t necessarily want to read about crime and sports, but if it’s happening within a three block radius of me, then I do care. So maybe instead of categorizing news sites into traditional categories, we can make the main navigational elements more relevant with categories like “time” and “location” (see the Spokesman Review for a great example of this).

One revelation that came about for me during this discussion (which might ironically deem this entire blog post irrelevant) is the fact that news design doesn’t matter at all when we’re all subscribing to news via RSS. Is there really any type of news site experience that will be more convenient and relevant? Am I ever going to want to visit 40 different sites each day, all of which are designed differently, and hunt down news that’s relevant to me within each of those sites? Or would I rather leave my Google Reader extension active in the browser, open in it in between tasks, quickly be presented with news I already know is relevant to me (distraction-free), and carry on with life? The latter is the news consumption pattern that fits best into my daily routine and allows me to consume the most news in the least amount of time. The fact that Google Reader’s social features push me the most relevant news being shared by the people I follow only increases its relevancy.

So maybe the question we should be asking ourselves as news designers isn’t how to make our sites better, but how to create an experience that surpasses that of the Google Reader experience. And maybe that’s the topic of another post. Stay tuned…

If you know a thing or two about graphic/web design, make your résumé mirror your knowledge.

When a “new media” journalist has a résumé made off a Microsoft Word template, it shows nothing about the creativity that person has.

I recently redesigned my résumé to give it that Twittery feel. Why?

• Using elements that are popular in web design show that I actually pay attention to web design trends
• It’s eye-catching. What would be more memorable? Times New Roman with a bulleted list, or Helvetica in colorful boxes?
• If I have “graphic design” listed as a talent, I sure as hell better have a unique résumé. In a way, the design of your resume is your own advertisement for yourself.

A few other tips for journalists’ resumes:

• Keep it short and clean. While this applies to pretty much every résumé, it’s especially important for a journalist. Journalists are supposed to be pros at keeping things concise and to the point. The first hint at whether you’re truly capable of that is through your resume.
• Run it through spell check. Again, this is more important for a journalist than it would be for an engineer. If you can’t copy edit your own resume, how can you be expected to copy edit your stories?

Who would you hire as your new media reporter?

Here are some other great ideas for resume design:

• Brand yourself. Give yourself a logo that you use on your résumé, your business card, your Web site and your blog. It’s a goal I have for myself, in fact. It gives you an identity and establishes your credibility
• Use color. I often hear the use of color/borders/shapes as huge résumé no-no. I disagree. Use color appropriately. Draw the readers’ eyes to the parts that are important, use it as a separator or as an accent.
• Use white space. Don’t make your résumé look like a novel. Again, applying basic principals of Web design, less text is better. Don’t distract the recruiter. Use bulleted lists and keep it clean.

Now, here’s some inspiration. Go open Photoshop, Illustrator, inDesign or all three and make yourself a new resume masterpiece. Even if you’re no good at graphic design, it’s easy to use good fonts and a little color to make your resume sparkle.

The big Chicago Tribune redesign has been released and, not surprisingly, it’s not the version that was heavily circulated around the Web that featured the title “Trib.”

Here are a few before and afters:

A prototype that surfaced the web last week showed a front page the read “Trib” big and bold across the masthead– a bold move that the traditional newspaper apparently wasn’t quite ready for.

While the new design is obviously a lot more modern, will it work? Newspapers won’t survive by simply giving themselves a facelift. They have to start from within and change the content to match the new design. What does that entail?

• More features
• A more magazine/blog-like appeal
• More modern design (like the Tribune)

My theory is that newspapers cannot keep using print to try to break news. If newspapers want to make it, they need to stop cutting jobs and pages. They need to add pages and add jobs. Change the content to be an in-depth analysis of yesterday’s news that was already broken on the Web.

When TV got big, radio was supposedly going die. That was almost 80 years ago.

The industry isn’t dying. It’s changing. We need to embrace it.

The new possible new design

When a potential version of the Chicago Tribune’s redesign starting trickling its way through the Web, I fell in love.

Although I’m known as a Web enthusiast, I’m also a sucker for great design — whether it be web or print. All graphic design is intriguing to me, and this prototype definitely sparked my interest.

If newspapers are going to survive, there needs to be major restructuring to represent elements of both the Web and magazines. I think this design accomplishes both:

• Masthead content – They go with the name “Trib.” This is brilliant because it’s casual. It sounds like the name of a blog and it’s what seasoned readers call the newspaper anyway. It’s making that personal connection with the readers, a very blog-like appeal, I think.
• Masthead style – This is no traditional masthead. Again, it reminds me of a blog banner. It feels so casual and clean. I love it.

The current, “old” design

• Headline typeface – The current design uses traditional serif fonts, while this potential new design has a main headline in a Helvetica-like font (much like a magazine would)
• Big central image - This is so magazine-like, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Newspapers are dying, but magazines aren’t.  Everything about the layout reminds me of a magazine, and even the content is a lot more feature oriented
• Basic, bold graphics – Although I can’t read the teasers on the bottom (I’m assuming they’re teasing to the Web), I can tell that the graphics are far more simplified than what the Tribune currently has in their print edition. They’re very much like icons you’d see on a Web site
• Infographics – The current Tribune is very text-heavy. This design adds more visual and presents statistics quickly and organized. Far more visually appealing than that traditional look of the current paper.

If newspapers want to survive, I think they need to do what the Chicago Tribune is considering: a massive redesign. Not only visually, but contextually.

Instead of being a place of who, what, where and when, the newspaper should be a place of “why?”

Instead of cutting pages and jobs and keeping the same content style, newspapers need to add pages and jobs and change their content style.

Instead of trying to break the news in the newspaper, the industry needs to break news online and use print as a deeper, more feature-like and in-depth look at the news that was broken online.

And the Trib already has a head start.

I counted down the days until Google’s new browser Chrome would be available to download. Initially, I was hooked on it, but each day I find myself clicking that familiar Firefox logo more and more.

For those Mac users who can’t download it yet, here’s a quick review of features.

The good things:

• Tabs on top. While Firefox and IE (ewww) have tabs below the address/favorites toolbar, Chrome does the opposite. The tabs are located at the very top of the page, so that each tab has the feel of being its own little window.
• Full-screen feel. Tabs on top and lack of a file menu give Chrome the feel of a full-screen all the time. It’s a really effective use of screen space.
• Speed dial. For those of you who have never used Opera browser, Speed dial is a set of “most visited” sites that appears when you open a new tab. Speed dial goes beyond a basic list and shows the actual screenshots of your top pages. While convenient, for our multi-tasking generation, it can also be very distracting.
• Resizable text boxes. This wasn’t a feature I saw a lot of publicizing about. But, when I started using Chrome, I realized that my text boxes on Gmail’s chat feature and on Facebook comments had a draggable corner for resizing. As trivial as it seems, I always want.  I hate having to scroll to read what I’m writing.
• Clean design. The sleek, classy look of Chrome means a lot in a browser. I often find in Firefox that the top navigation feels cluttered and messy, so I’m constantly renaming bookmarks to shorter words to make it feel more clean. Not the case with Chrome. Google knows simplicity like no other.
• Dragging out tabs. Sometimes you just have one tab that deserves its own window. In Firefox, you have to copy that URL, open a new window, then paste it again. In chrome you just drag it out. Why didn’t we think of this before?

Negatives

• Ads misplaced. When using Myspace, I found that ads from the right side of the page (presumably placed in iframes) were somehow bumped to the middle of the page, covering content. I’m sure it’s a little bug they’ll work out.
• Can’t type keywords into address bar. For example, on Firefox, if I were to type “Mustang Daily” into the address bar (no http:// or www or .com), I would automatically be directed to the top search result for Mustang Daily. Although you’d assume Google would follow suit (much like the “I’m Feeling Lucky” button on Google homepage), it does not work so flawlessly. Instead, it takes you to a Google search results page of listings.
• Security issues. In Firefox, to retrieve saved passwords, there is an option for a required “Master password.” This means, if someone steals your laptop and tries to view all your passwords, they can’t access that information without having an additional password. Google hasn’t stepped up its security game yet. If you save your passwords and someone steals your laptop, you’re SOL without a master key.
• The logo. Although this has nothing to do with how the browser functions, having to look at that logo drives me crazy sometimes. The older generation probably doesn’t get it, but for generation y, notice how it resembles a multi-colored pokeball from Pokemon. Yuck.