  Design Management: WHY DOES IT SEEM TO BE SO HARD? | |||
|
"How to train editors who design." A multi-part essay from my files at The Poynter Institute.
Home page: www.ronreason.com
Articles index for this site. |
By Ron Reason Not to be republished without permission or recirculated without attribution.
"Why can't our layout editors (or paginators) produce better
designs?"
"What can we do to enhance creativity?"
"How can we improve the planning process?"
"Is there any way to get our staff to collaborate more effectively?"
Often, these questions are on the minds of editors and art directors who
invite me to visit their newsroom and provide training for the staff.
Almost always, one visit to the newsroom is enough to explain why they
are running into roadblocks. Following are some of the reasons why the
above questions plague so many newsrooms:
Lack of definition in work roles. At one medium-sized paper I'm
familiar with, the person who held the title of "graphics editor" also
was in charge of creating prototypes for proposed new sections, scanning
in and toning halftones, typesetting and tracking countless logos for
use throughout the paper, and - when time allowed - produce
informational graphics. And guess what usually was last on the priority
list?
Graphics editing is not the same as design direction, which is not the
same as art direction. They are three distinct duties, and the person
who holds any one of those titles may not be skilled in all three areas.
Define the role. In many cases, these are three duties that are too much
for one person to handle. Think twice before overloading one person with
all these tasks.
Lines of authority aren't clear. "We can't cut stories at my
paper, even if it means running a full jump page with no visuals. This
is a writers paper," a copy editor once told me. In a later
conversation, the top editor of her paper told me that he also thinks
the stories run too long in his paper. Either someone (a middle manager,
most likely) was strong-arming the copy desk into not cutting stories,
or the desk was operating under an incredibly persistent "urban newsroom
myth."
Secrecy. It's hard to believe a centerpiece story can be in the
writing and original editing stages for weeks, yet the copy desk isn't
informed about it until 8 p.m. the evening before publication. But I've
seen this scenario at a number of papers. The result: low morale, poor
design and packaging, errors. All because someone, for whatever reason,
is keeping his cards pretty close to his chest.
People working in isolation. At another newspaper, designers in
the newsroom were laying out feature pages while the copy desk in the
features department, in another room hundreds of feet away, edited the
copy and wrote the headlines - without ever seeing proofs of the art for
the pages, and rarely seeing the layout in progress. The result:
disconnect between words and visuals on the features pages.
Muddy lines, if any, separating editorial duties from technical
support. Should the graphics editor also be the person in charge of
troubleshooting Macs? Maybe so, if you're willing to give up quite a bit
of attention to the editorial product in exchange. (One newsroom had its
art director de-bugging Macs not only in the newsroom but all through
the company. This might be a harsh reality in a small shop, but it's
nearly unforgivable in a decent sized publication.)
Lack of training. Copy editors are often ill prepared to produce
creative page layouts. Most of them went to journalism school, after
all. They studied words, not visuals; facts, not creativity. Now in the
real world, managers have given them the tools of typography, color and
page architecture without realizing that most journalists have no formal
education in these areas.
At the same time, news artists are not always the best people to produce
features page design. A skill as an illustrator does not necessarily
mean the person is skilled with typography, or knowledgeable about how
headlines and visuals go together. All visual tasks should not be lumped
into the same job description.
Quite often, the newspaper of 2000 is being put out with staff
structures and communication processes left over from years or decades
past. Periodically, it's essential to revisit the newsroom heirarchy,
job descriptions, titles, turf, and processes. Are you having the right
kind of meetings? Are the right people in attendance? Should you be
having meetings at all? Unless your paper is exactly the same as it was
in 1957, philosophically, your staff structure had better evolve.
One critical element missing in a lot of newsrooms is a clear system of
design management. Training, coaching, critiqueing and teaching are
important design management duties. Have you designated someone to do
this? Do they have the authority, and the time, to do this efficiently?
Designate a percentage of their work week to perform these tasks.
Otherwise, they are just plugging the holes and bailing water to keep
the paper afloat. Just as you'd have a city editor review the work of
the staff's metro reporters, designate someone to review the layouts of
the copy desk - and thoughtfully, not in a drive-by, before deadline
hits.
So, where do you start? How do you get better if any of the above
describes your newsroom? Begin with a frank conversation of priorities,
and review your staff to see if you have the right players in place.
Does it matter that morale is low on the copy desk? If so, maybe you
need to designate a champion. Are you disappointed in your paper's
feature layouts? If so, you need to allocate some real design expertise
in that area. (And no, this doesn't always mean bringing in a designer
or art director from outside. Sometimes, the design star is already on
the staff, waiting to be discovered, or given a boost.)© 2000, Ron Reason. Not to be republished without permission or recirculated without attribution. Back to top of page |
| |
|
| |||