The Redesign of an Icon (WSJ) – It Did Not Matter
I am a daily reader and a big fan of the Wall Street Journal paper. Over the past few years, the Journal has not been hesitant to make changes. They redesigned their layout a couple years ago. They added a Personal Journal section. They started a Weekend Edition. With each major change or addition, I held my breath and wanted to know how my experience was going to change. The redesign of an icon is not to be taken lightly.
I’ve liked the changes they have made in the past. Surprisingly, I read the Journal as much for pleasure as for business. If you had asked me if that were possible ten years ago, I would have said no.
So when the Journal made a huge design change on Jan 2, I once again braced myself. There were a lot of initial thoughts that were negative. Some thought the smaller paper felt less substantial (I did too, at first). Others felt that profits were trumping experience (print newspaper are facing so many challenges that I expect papers to try to cut costs).
I did not want to come out with an immediate judgment. People generally are uncomfortable with change.
As the two weeks came to pass, my blog post was supposed to say something along the lines: I am fine with the redesign. I do like the smaller size for convenience reasons; I still feel that it gives ups an intangible heft-ness. It felt easier to read; the content remained good. Basically, no harm, but no great breakthroughs. Summary: boy, it must hard to redesign icons.
But earlier today, I read a front page article in the Journal (subscription needed, sorry) titled: “An Immigration Raid Aids Blacks — For a Time.” This article documents the changes in a company town when federal immigration agents chased out a mostly Hispanic workforce and made opportunities for local African-Americans.
It was a fascinating read. Uncomfortable at times, revealing, stark, worrisome, maybe even inflammatory. But it was brave and it was IMPORTANT. I encourage people to pick up today’s Journal and read that story.
After reading that story, any post on redesign seemed small. So tomorrow and next week and next month, I will pick up the Journal, not because of its width or font or layout, but because of its proven ability to publish important stories.
[Image from the terrific site newsdesigner.com]

3 Comments so far
Leave a comment
My prediction: after going from a six-column to a five-column format, the WSJ will eventually switch to 4 columns, then 3, then 2, then 1. By the time they eliminate the print version and go entirely online, the newspaper will be no bigger than an index card.
By Dylan Tweney on 01.17.07 2:22 pm
I know your tongue is in your cheek, Dylan, but that would be a sad day. I do love the act of reading a *paper.* Guess I am now a dinosaur.
By You Mon Tsang on 01.17.07 2:32 pm
If they reduce it down to two columns, and roll it up around a central cardboard tube, they can create an entirely new consumption paradigm! This way, each day’s paper can be distributed for usage in a way consistent with the high quality standards of their content. Ahem.
By bob corrigan on 01.18.07 11:35 am
TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>