Style over content?

[saaby93]

Whats everyone else make of this article?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-5535d83a-2...
I expected a typical easy to read article explaining why the guy had met his end
Using Firefox here it, had to wade scroll down through loads of images before eventually getting to the crux knub(sp) of what happened

Is it the new way to write articles

[marshalla]

Can't be bothered even trying to read it. I *loathe* that style of page. They think it works well on tablets. They're wrong.

[anonymous-user]

WTF!

[Otispunkmeyer]

That is absolutely nasty!

[rodericb]

This ipad i am using won't even open it - the browser crashes.

[hornetrider]

What a fking mess.

Loathe the BBC webste now. All the news articles have switched to a huge font size with massive pictures, and the number of actual words in articles has dramatically decreased. It's just majorly dumbed down and completely unappealing to browse through it.

[anonymous-user]

rodericb said:

This ipad i am using won't even open it - the browser crashes.

Neither will mine, just keeps reloading. What is it?

[Hooli]

hornetrider said:

What a fking mess.

Loathe the BBC webste now. All the news articles have switched to a huge font size with massive pictures, and the number of actual words in articles has dramatically decreased. It's just majorly dumbed down and completely unappealing to browse through it.

Tried it the other day, never again. As you say it's utterly ste & unreadable.

[DragsterRR]

Come join us on the "Has technology passed you by" thread.

Which has morphed into the "Isn't technology all just a bit st and trivial these days" thread.

[Derek Smith]

The graphics are excellent. The layout is clever. It is a fluff piece so not sure what it is doing in the news section. But that last apart, visually it is quality.

Web graphics has taken a backward step as far as presentation is concerned with most people surfing on mobile devices. Such a shame. It was a new art form, and one which seemed to attract quality designers. Artists in fact. Who now wants to design for 2" wide screens?

An article should look good. I was taught that 'there is no excuse for ugly', but that was more than a few weeks before smartphones.

Full marks to the designer. Looks good.

[Eric Mc]

I thought it was a bit of a mess. But the main part of the BBC News web pages seem to be still fairly rationally laid out.

[RizzoTheRat]

The actual article looks ok as a magazine article, I've read a read a few similarly designed ones in the past and while it's not my favourite layout it's ok, however it's not what I want to see for a news article.

hornetrider said:

Loathe the BBC webste now. All the news articles have switched to a huge font size with massive pictures, and the number of actual words in articles has dramatically decreased. It's just majorly dumbed down and completely unappealing to browse through it.

They've also started doing a lot of new stories as video clips. I tend to read the news at lunch in the office so don't really want to have to put headphones on when I used to be able to just read the story on the news.

[DragsterRR]

Derek Smith said:

The graphics are excellent. The layout is clever. It is a fluff piece so not sure what it is doing in the news section. But that last apart, visually it is quality.

Web graphics has taken a backward step as far as presentation is concerned with most people surfing on mobile devices. Such a shame. It was a new art form, and one which seemed to attract quality designers. Artists in fact. Who now wants to design for 2" wide screens?

An article should look good. I was taught that 'there is no excuse for ugly', but that was more than a few weeks before smartphones.

Full marks to the designer. Looks good.

Totally disagree.
Erroneous graphics and page setups that make things take longer to load just piss me right off.
And this "Hey lets design everything for tablets" bks just makes it worse.
Not every has uber fast broadband.
The amount of data downloaded for that article was probably a full encyclopaedia brittanicas worth of text.

What a waste of time, effort and resources.

[Thorodin]

It felt as though somebody was trying to sell me something. Certainly an homage piece on the individual and an advert for organ donation to go alongside the current advertising campaign so for that reason I'll not complain. All in all, very professional if that's how you measure eye-catching.

Edited by Thorodin on Tuesday 1st December 17:06

[saaby93]

Thorodin said:

It felt as though somebody was trying to sell me something. Certainly an homage piece on the individual and an advert for organ donation to go alongside the current advertising campaign so for that reason I'll not complain. All in all, very professional if that's how you measure eye-catching.

Edited by Thorodin on Tuesday 1st December 17:06

Actually that's what I was hoping it was
A homage to the guy a few pictures. Something that would fit on A4 tops.
Once I'd tested my patience and got to the bit at the end to finally find out what happened, it was still too woolly.

The only reason I got to the end was I was determined to see if it was as bad all the way through

It was.

[rohrl]

I experienced a story layout like this in the New York Times a couple of weeks ago. It's clearly the "in thing" among web designers.

I didn't read the NYT story and I didn't read the BBC story you linked either because the design was so intrusive.

[Thorodin]

On the other hand, if you were an avid sportsman or fan, and not an organ donor, might it arouse your interest in that subject? On the basis of what counts is what works there must be an increase in awareness as a result. The target market would not necessarily be publishing experts or be ultra sceptics of the finer points of advertising - isn't that how advertising works?

[saaby93]

Thorodin said:

On the other hand, if you were an avid sportsman or fan, and not an organ donor, might it arouse your interest in that subject?

no not really, just turns me off trying to wade through tons of trivia rather than the key point of the item

Thorodin said:

On the basis of what counts is what works there must be an increase in awareness as a result.

looks to me like less awareness as people switch off

Thorodin said:

The target market would not necessarily be publishing experts or be ultra sceptics of the finer points of advertising - isn't that how advertising works?

but isnt it targeted at graphics publishing experts look how cool this item is, rather than the targeted market who just want the info straight

[Thorodin]

Maybe, but I have doubts. Avid sports fans will be attracted by the graphics and resolution. They will also be young and healthy generally, and therefore ideal organ donors! That demographic would not be concerned about journalistic tradition - more the 'action' pics. I wonder how many on here fall into that grouping.

[Huff]

The Grauniad is doing this kind of thing a lot on some of their longer pieces too. I say 'noscript' to that.

It might 'look good' but actually it is a graphic mess that disobeys Rule no.1 - really good graphic work doesn't detract from content presentation or draw attention to itself. The use of differential scrolling, and the js-driven mess that doesn't render equally across browser platforms just gets in the way, utterly.

Style over substance, yes. I wanted to read the article, and can't be arsed to finish it owing to the rank, interfering presentation.