A few emailers have wondered when I was going to get around to posting something about the end of Bradley University's NCAA tourney run...
OK, I was in denial for a few days. That said, it is clear that the referees cheated them.
However, the fine Bradley Braves did as well as Duke and who would have called THAT? And you have to admit, it turns out my mocking of school librarians who picked George Mason was kinda prescient... That would seem to be the beginning and the end of my college hoops clairvoyance, however.
Now I can go back to ignoring college basketball for another 11 months. Still, I am proud of those Bradley Braves!
More later,
Mark
Monday, March 27, 2006
Wednesday, March 22, 2006
Don't Hate Me Because I Don't Care If You Are Pretty
One of the brightest essays I've read recently on the state of the newspaper industry can be found here:
BrassTacksDesign.Com
Alan Jacobson at BrassTacks Design has graciously allowed me to link to "If newspaper markets are so different, who do newspapers look so much alike?" I thank him not only for the link but for ingeniously demonstrating one of my pet peeves: Editors who slavishly follow so-called "industry trends" instead of seeking truly innovative, market-derived solutions to serve their specific audiences.
As shocking as it might seem to outsiders, far too many newspapers, even in the 21st Century, are designed without the input of focus groups and advisory boards and market studies and reader feedback. Oh, feedback eventually comes to play, but only after the "redesign" has been trudged out and angry customers complain that a certain feature/font/point size/ has been eliminated/changed/diminished. Then the newspaper might respond to feedback. Maybe.
How, you might be asking yourself, can this possibly occur? Good question.
The long answer will be in my book. But if I were going to thumbnail the process, it looks like this: Editor A is "bored" with his newspaper's look. Or he falls under the Readership Institute spell and and adopts the mantra that all (generic) readers prefer a (generic) "active" look; that readers won't read something if it isn't "attractive." So, Editor A or his/her appointed in-house design expert will spend a week at a newspaper design camp. He or she will return convinced that after looking at what everyone else is doing, the newspaper can adopt changes that readers will love, even though those readers didn't even know they wanted them.
Even I have been guilty of this phenomenon. But it was a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away... I listened to people smarter than me and eventually became enlightened. Today I stand with other long-time media professionals steadfastly convinced "Content is king." That many so like-minded individuals currently seek work is merely a coincidence. Or so I am told.
Anyway, allow me to prove my point: Yesterday was the day after an election in Illinois. I don't care how ugly your front page was, it sold more papers than Tuesday's edition - despite the low voter turnout. Nearly every newspaper in the U.S. sells more newspapers the day after an election than nearly every other day of the year. Large. Small. Prettied up. Ghastly ugly.
This leads to my my long-held belief that the editor who discovers how to make each edition as sought after as the day after an election will have truly cracked the DNA code of his/her audience. Sadly, many prefer to wait for something like Readership.org to do that for them.
Because of the 1982 debut of USA Today and the advent of such groups as the renamed Society of News (sans "paper") Design, editors have done much to change the look of newspapers in the past quarter century. Design has improved - no question - and readability has been improved. Regardless, the period of 1982-present has been horrific for the newspaper industry in terms of circulation and readership. So, methinks, editors may have been too-focused on the comfortable realm of design instead of the hard work of talking with our audience about improving content. In fact, one could make the argument that since there are fewer newspaper reporters now than in 1982, that the industry was completely focused on the wrong readership solutions.
For the book... Save something for the book... Yes, I am stilling writing that book...
As Alan has demonstrated on his site, even when newspaper editors have tackled design, many have gone about it in an awkward fashion. Those designs were likely the results of editors aping editors NOT editors working closely to glean the specific needs of their individual audiences to create an intuitive experience.
In fact, there is a dirty little lie in the newspaper industry shared among many editors. They believe they can design a page that is so good it can trick readers into reading it - even if said reader is not interested in the content! A graphic here. Some white space there. A stylish font here. An entry point there. Voila! No one will even notice we laid off more reporters today!
I tried to make the following point to an editor recently: You do not have enough design talent and your company does not supply you with enough technology to trick me into reading something that is not of interest to me. Better you should err in spending your time on local content than on an elaborate design of some wire "package."
I am not advocating that newspapers look ugly. Clean, simple design concepts were made available to all many years ago by Tim Harrower in the classic "The Newspaper Designer's Handbook." Folks like Alan at BrassTacks have loads of good ideas (read the sidebar article on the Bakersfield project!).
However, market-specific design and content augmentations can only be achieved via sweat equity and the tough work of cracking your market's specific DNA.
All the answers to your newspaper's success are in your market. Involve the audience. Worship your readers. Innovation will follow.
More later,
Mark
BrassTacksDesign.Com
Alan Jacobson at BrassTacks Design has graciously allowed me to link to "If newspaper markets are so different, who do newspapers look so much alike?" I thank him not only for the link but for ingeniously demonstrating one of my pet peeves: Editors who slavishly follow so-called "industry trends" instead of seeking truly innovative, market-derived solutions to serve their specific audiences.
As shocking as it might seem to outsiders, far too many newspapers, even in the 21st Century, are designed without the input of focus groups and advisory boards and market studies and reader feedback. Oh, feedback eventually comes to play, but only after the "redesign" has been trudged out and angry customers complain that a certain feature/font/point size/ has been eliminated/changed/diminished. Then the newspaper might respond to feedback. Maybe.
How, you might be asking yourself, can this possibly occur? Good question.
The long answer will be in my book. But if I were going to thumbnail the process, it looks like this: Editor A is "bored" with his newspaper's look. Or he falls under the Readership Institute spell and and adopts the mantra that all (generic) readers prefer a (generic) "active" look; that readers won't read something if it isn't "attractive." So, Editor A or his/her appointed in-house design expert will spend a week at a newspaper design camp. He or she will return convinced that after looking at what everyone else is doing, the newspaper can adopt changes that readers will love, even though those readers didn't even know they wanted them.
Even I have been guilty of this phenomenon. But it was a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away... I listened to people smarter than me and eventually became enlightened. Today I stand with other long-time media professionals steadfastly convinced "Content is king." That many so like-minded individuals currently seek work is merely a coincidence. Or so I am told.
Anyway, allow me to prove my point: Yesterday was the day after an election in Illinois. I don't care how ugly your front page was, it sold more papers than Tuesday's edition - despite the low voter turnout. Nearly every newspaper in the U.S. sells more newspapers the day after an election than nearly every other day of the year. Large. Small. Prettied up. Ghastly ugly.
This leads to my my long-held belief that the editor who discovers how to make each edition as sought after as the day after an election will have truly cracked the DNA code of his/her audience. Sadly, many prefer to wait for something like Readership.org to do that for them.
Because of the 1982 debut of USA Today and the advent of such groups as the renamed Society of News (sans "paper") Design, editors have done much to change the look of newspapers in the past quarter century. Design has improved - no question - and readability has been improved. Regardless, the period of 1982-present has been horrific for the newspaper industry in terms of circulation and readership. So, methinks, editors may have been too-focused on the comfortable realm of design instead of the hard work of talking with our audience about improving content. In fact, one could make the argument that since there are fewer newspaper reporters now than in 1982, that the industry was completely focused on the wrong readership solutions.
For the book... Save something for the book... Yes, I am stilling writing that book...
As Alan has demonstrated on his site, even when newspaper editors have tackled design, many have gone about it in an awkward fashion. Those designs were likely the results of editors aping editors NOT editors working closely to glean the specific needs of their individual audiences to create an intuitive experience.
In fact, there is a dirty little lie in the newspaper industry shared among many editors. They believe they can design a page that is so good it can trick readers into reading it - even if said reader is not interested in the content! A graphic here. Some white space there. A stylish font here. An entry point there. Voila! No one will even notice we laid off more reporters today!
I tried to make the following point to an editor recently: You do not have enough design talent and your company does not supply you with enough technology to trick me into reading something that is not of interest to me. Better you should err in spending your time on local content than on an elaborate design of some wire "package."
I am not advocating that newspapers look ugly. Clean, simple design concepts were made available to all many years ago by Tim Harrower in the classic "The Newspaper Designer's Handbook." Folks like Alan at BrassTacks have loads of good ideas (read the sidebar article on the Bakersfield project!).
However, market-specific design and content augmentations can only be achieved via sweat equity and the tough work of cracking your market's specific DNA.
All the answers to your newspaper's success are in your market. Involve the audience. Worship your readers. Innovation will follow.
More later,
Mark
Monday, March 20, 2006
The good, bad, ugly...
Well, there's good and bad in the March Madness front today.
On the good side: Bradley. All hail Bradley University!
On the bad side: My bracket entry is in shambles. I only picked nine correct teams in the Sweetwood 16. I still have six alive in the Elite Eight and three of the Final Four. When Duke wins, that means I'll just be beat by everyone else who picked Duke but who fared better in the early rounds.
But: If good ol' BU knocks off Duke in the Final Four, we'll all go down in flames together and the elementary school librarian (i.e. my sister) who picked George Mason because the name reminded her of a renown children's author will win like she wins every year.
Which just goes to prove that there's usually little logic to or lessons which can be derived from these NCAA basketball tourney bracket competitions. Yet, we're drawn to the annual spring ritual like politicians to sleazy ads.
Speaking of such, I wasn't inclined to vote for Jim Oberweis in the Republican gubernatorial balloting Tuesday. Then the strident Phyllis Schlafly called me to extoll Oberweis' virtues and implicating herself into Illinois politics in an ugly manner. Even though it was just a recording, it was almost enough to get me to pull a Democratic ballot...
If I did, and I won't, I would have to cast my vote for Edwin Eisendrath for governor because a.) He's not Blago; b.) His TV ads are sharp and amusing; c.) He actually spent some time on his website addressing issues.
More later,
Mark
On the good side: Bradley. All hail Bradley University!
On the bad side: My bracket entry is in shambles. I only picked nine correct teams in the Sweetwood 16. I still have six alive in the Elite Eight and three of the Final Four. When Duke wins, that means I'll just be beat by everyone else who picked Duke but who fared better in the early rounds.
But: If good ol' BU knocks off Duke in the Final Four, we'll all go down in flames together and the elementary school librarian (i.e. my sister) who picked George Mason because the name reminded her of a renown children's author will win like she wins every year.
Which just goes to prove that there's usually little logic to or lessons which can be derived from these NCAA basketball tourney bracket competitions. Yet, we're drawn to the annual spring ritual like politicians to sleazy ads.
Speaking of such, I wasn't inclined to vote for Jim Oberweis in the Republican gubernatorial balloting Tuesday. Then the strident Phyllis Schlafly called me to extoll Oberweis' virtues and implicating herself into Illinois politics in an ugly manner. Even though it was just a recording, it was almost enough to get me to pull a Democratic ballot...
If I did, and I won't, I would have to cast my vote for Edwin Eisendrath for governor because a.) He's not Blago; b.) His TV ads are sharp and amusing; c.) He actually spent some time on his website addressing issues.
More later,
Mark
Sunday, March 19, 2006
Braves win! Braves win!
Ladies and gentlemen, please rise and remove your hats and then bow and push the button below as we sing the Bradley University fight song:
Bradley Fight Song
Lyrics for the unannointed:
Charge on, Charge on Bradley,
March right down the field,
Foes may press you,
Foes may even stress you,
But we’ll never yield.
Fight for Alma Mater,
Plunge right thru to victory.
Fight on , Fight on Bradley,
And fight for varsity!
Thank you. You may now take your seats. But remain bowed.
After beating fourth-ranked Kansas, the Bradley Braves overpowered the fifth-seeded Pittsburgh Panthers 72-66 to make the Sweetwood 16.
More later, after I finish the Bradley Victory Dance.
Mark
Bradley Fight Song
Lyrics for the unannointed:
Charge on, Charge on Bradley,
March right down the field,
Foes may press you,
Foes may even stress you,
But we’ll never yield.
Fight for Alma Mater,
Plunge right thru to victory.
Fight on , Fight on Bradley,
And fight for varsity!
Thank you. You may now take your seats. But remain bowed.
After beating fourth-ranked Kansas, the Bradley Braves overpowered the fifth-seeded Pittsburgh Panthers 72-66 to make the Sweetwood 16.
More later, after I finish the Bradley Victory Dance.
Mark
Saturday, March 18, 2006
Go, Bradley, go!
OK, I have survived the first 32 March Madness battles with a 21-11 record. Only three of my Sweetwood 16 picks have thus far been eliminated. My Elite 8 and Final 4 are intact.
The Final Four: Duke, Gonzaga, UNC and Villanova with Duke beating UNC for the win. Sorry Bradley University.
However, if good ol' BU makes a liar out of me, I will gladly suffer the indignity. They were awesome Friday night against favored Kansas.
Let's see... I gotta make good on all the salt rubbed in my various wounds over the last decade. I did some checking and this is a list of teams I don't see in the NCAA tourney's next round: Illinois State University, Marquette University, any team that rhymes with "ichigan", Western Illinois University, Northern Illinois University (that was just a joke) and, of course, SUNY-Brockport. I'll wait until the Sweetwood 16 list to mock my Northwestern and University of Illinois friends...
Sadly Southern Illinois is no longer in the tournament... Lousy bunch of cheatin' dogs...
In case you missed you missed the fine Missouri Valley Conference tournament championship March 5, the Bradley Braves lead 24-23 at half. Suddenly, the desperate Southern Illinois Salukis went berserk and broke a cheerleader's neck, thus ensuring the ESPN SportsCenter clip. A confused Bradley went on to lose.
That's all behind us now. Bradley is playing on and Southern is home practicing its cheers...
By the way, I'm not sure whether it was Airborne or that osscillio-whatever stuff, but I crushed that cold and was back to my old self by midweek! I've heard people whine about colds that lasted weeks/months. To them I offer the prescription featured on the last blog below. Trust me: It works!
More later!
Mark
Sunday, March 12, 2006
The Cure for the Common Cold
As previously documented, I am addicted to iTunes. I love everything about it from its functionality to its intuitiveness. Oh yeah, I like the tunes, too.
Here is something else I've been playing with in my free time (which seemingly grows shorter by the day): The "music genome project" at
Pandora.Com .
If you like to listen to music and you don't necessarily want to pay for it, this is a site for you. Essentially, you plug your earphones into Mac (or lesser computer), hit the site and type in the name of your current favorite song. Right now, "Love Me Like You" by the Magic Numbers is topping my personal Hot 100 list. The site then plays that song for you and based on that particular listening habit will begin serving up song after song in a similar genre.
So, here is what happened: "Love Me Like You" was followed by "7:30" by the Pernice Brothers which was followed by "Details of Attraction" by Consonant which was followed by "Chromium" by The Church which was followed by "The Mule" by the Magic Numbers... Some nice listening music when you are sitting around on a Sunday afternoon updating your blog in a vain attempt to answer those "why haven't you updated your blog since your birhtday?" emails.
The Pandora site offers two versions: A paid concept in which you are spared pop-up ads and a free site that features ads that I don't pay any attention to since I am listening to the music...
I am also attempting to fight off the latest cold which began to impact me Saturday night. I had an aborted one in November during Thanksgiving weekend which I battled with Airborne. Mary just caught a hellacious cold after our return from Las Vegas which I thought I had ducked. So, here is my remedy for the onset of a cold:
• Airborne, or the Walgreen's equivalent Wal-borne every three hours. These are effervescent tablets that you mix with water for a Tang-like experience. Developed by an elementary school teacher, this is a homeopathic remedy which is alleged to boost your immune system. I say it works.
• 2000 mgs. of Vitamin C.
• Two multi-vitamins.
• Echinacea capsules.
• Ice cream. It just makes me feel better.
To this regimen, I add the Hall's Defense Harvest Cherry lozenges with zinc, Vitamin C and echinacea and I am also the house guinea pig for Oscillococcinum.
The cold has no chance.
More later,
Mark
Here is something else I've been playing with in my free time (which seemingly grows shorter by the day): The "music genome project" at
Pandora.Com .
If you like to listen to music and you don't necessarily want to pay for it, this is a site for you. Essentially, you plug your earphones into Mac (or lesser computer), hit the site and type in the name of your current favorite song. Right now, "Love Me Like You" by the Magic Numbers is topping my personal Hot 100 list. The site then plays that song for you and based on that particular listening habit will begin serving up song after song in a similar genre.
So, here is what happened: "Love Me Like You" was followed by "7:30" by the Pernice Brothers which was followed by "Details of Attraction" by Consonant which was followed by "Chromium" by The Church which was followed by "The Mule" by the Magic Numbers... Some nice listening music when you are sitting around on a Sunday afternoon updating your blog in a vain attempt to answer those "why haven't you updated your blog since your birhtday?" emails.
The Pandora site offers two versions: A paid concept in which you are spared pop-up ads and a free site that features ads that I don't pay any attention to since I am listening to the music...
I am also attempting to fight off the latest cold which began to impact me Saturday night. I had an aborted one in November during Thanksgiving weekend which I battled with Airborne. Mary just caught a hellacious cold after our return from Las Vegas which I thought I had ducked. So, here is my remedy for the onset of a cold:
• Airborne, or the Walgreen's equivalent Wal-borne every three hours. These are effervescent tablets that you mix with water for a Tang-like experience. Developed by an elementary school teacher, this is a homeopathic remedy which is alleged to boost your immune system. I say it works.
• 2000 mgs. of Vitamin C.
• Two multi-vitamins.
• Echinacea capsules.
• Ice cream. It just makes me feel better.
To this regimen, I add the Hall's Defense Harvest Cherry lozenges with zinc, Vitamin C and echinacea and I am also the house guinea pig for Oscillococcinum.
The cold has no chance.
More later,
Mark
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
