6 ms·
It's fairly plain to see that the "redesign" completely disregards any presence of advertisement. I'd say that would be a constraint failed to be considered.
by tonydev 15y ago
It's fairly plain to see that the "redesign" completely disregards any presence of advertisement. I'd say that would be a constraint failed to be considered.
- dmbass 15y ago"Completely" is unfair. See: http://andyrutledge.com/images09/newsSite/nyt-redux-article.html http://andyrutledge.com/images09/newsSite/nyt-redux-article.... But just come out and say "we had to cover the site in ads and couldn't do a better design" if that's the case.
- ricardobeat 15y agoI think you're missing the part that says Since news is accessed only via subscription, most of the ads can be eliminated from the pages.
- cdcarter 15y agobut...news isn't accessed only via subscription, so you can't really use that justification...
- ralphsaunders 15y agoThat simply isn't true. > Since news is accessed only via subscription, most of the ads can be eliminated from the pages. Story pages could still have one or two tastefully-presented ads, but preservation of the content is what will keep readers happy, engaged, and willing to continue paying their subscriptions…just like in olden times. http://andyrutledge.com/images09/newsSite/nyt-redux-article.html http://andyrutledge.com/images09/newsSite/nyt-redux-article....
- mrkurt 15y ago"Considering" a constraint using magic fairy dust and an imaginary world where people pay for news content isn't really addressing it, unfortunately. It's like saying "since people can levitate, we can ditch their shoes. They can wear minimal shoes for times when they might want to land, but unencumbered feet will keep people happy".