My gut reaction? Bleh …

I understand that it is getting harder and harder to make money in the media business and that the consequence of this fact is major changes in the newspaper business. Last week the Sun-Times laid off dozens of staff in an effort to avoid going belly-up. And they still might. These lay off came just months after a dramatic redesign that was supposed to trim content and make the paper more readable.

Now the Tribune is making changes supposedly for the better. They have narrowed the paper’s size once again, alleged in response to changing industry standards. Fine. They’ve changed the nameplate (see below), supposedly to make it look less “cluttered” and not to save money on blue ink. Fine. Boring but fine.

nameplate

My biggest concern is the loss of content. They write:”Throughout the paper we have simplified our layout, reduced clutter and made our columns less dense in order to make the type easier to read.”

Have they cut content? Does “less dense” mean just “less?”

I also question the timing of these changes. They just this month raised the price to $0.75, which certainly drove away some readers. Now they’ve changed the format and design. The question is will doubling up these changes mitigate the lost readership by bringing a little new interest? Or will it simply reinforce the conviction of those who have decided there’s no longer any reason to buy the print Tribune? I don’t have an answer, but I’d love to hear their reasoning.