The Chicago Tribune new-look a vast wasteland

So, the first full week of the “new-look” Chicago Tribune newspaper is complete.

I was pretty ambivalent to the “new” Trib design and the 50/50 split of editorial and advertising during the run up to the change as well as during the first week of publication. I guess I figured that the Trib and its heritage were bigger than any change that could be wrought on the paper. Well, I think I was wrong.

The lead-in to the design change was peppered with silly ads in the paper itself as well as interviews with Tribune-ites as well as outside critics.

The paper’s new publisher, I believe, commented how the new Chicago Tribune would be true to the hallowed brand. It seems to me that the “new” Trib is to the Chica Trib brand and Chicago journalism what “new” Coke was to colas.

A Boss Comparison
Last Sunday after running a race I stopped by one of the local Starbucks for a beverage and a scone. I also picked up a copy of the Sunday New York Times to read while enjoying my petit dejune. I started reading a front-page story about the current financial crisis. It was in depth and explained the situation with Fannie Mae in a way that anyone could understand. It was an interesting story, informative and well written.

Long story short – I finished the NYT front section at home then moved to the “new” Trib.

The difference between the two newspapers was amazing. The “new” Trib had some large color photo above the fold. I’m sorry I can’t remember what the subject of the photo was. There were a couple of stories below the fold and I can’t remember those either but I do know that there was nothing like the NYT story about Fannie Mae.

Inside, the “new” Trib wasn’t much better… large photos, graphs, maps above the fold and ads generally below. With each page turn it seemed that there was no relief. The editorial jumble was competing with the advertising… except where they had positioned two full page ads on facings pages, whew! Editorial was sliced and diced into a tossed salad of type, graphics and photos without depth or seeming continuity.

Oh, and the content left much to be desired. Much of the content was picked up from other sources and seemed to be included because it fit a certain amount of space available on the page. I guess that since they’ve laid off so many reporters at the paper that original journalism is not important to the “new” Trib which really grates me since my college degree is in Journalism.

Also, as the owner of an advertising agency, circus-like page layouts grate me as well. All those little boxes, graphics and stuff are all competing with the ads! The next time we’re buying space in the Trib for a client, we’ll certainly be looking at that issue. Why would they want to compete with their bread and butter – the advertisers?

The “new” Trib is a far cry from the previous model. In that, the new management has been successful. But there’s a difference between “successful good” and “successful bad.”

To me, the “new” Chicago Tribune presents itself as a small-town daily, certainly not the icon of American journalism that it was. I understand that institutions must move forward but too often people equate appealing to the lowest common denominator as moving forward. I reality I think the “new” Trib is providing less content to fewer and fewer people. It’s all very sad.