Comments on: CNN Redesigns

By: dan

dan — Sun, 03 Jul 2005 16:27:21 +0000

ya nice design….

But out of all the site cnn should be the leader in accessibility, taking full advantage of css, xhtml, rss and all the acronyms out there ;)

Them nothing going with xhtml, is just them saying they are above that (kinda like microsoft)

By: MattLat

MattLat — Mon, 20 Jun 2005 16:10:14 +0000

CNN should upgrade to xhtml... most of those errors showing up at the moment though, are easy fixes. As for the Sydney Morning Herald, they're really ahead of the game when it comes to css and not using tables (their xhtml could use a bit of work though), but from a useability standpoint, I think that cnn is doing a lot better. Clear headlines, navigation that stands out, page isn't cluttered. Each one has it's pros and cons.

By: Eric Gruber

Eric Gruber — Mon, 20 Jun 2005 16:03:01 +0000

Although I’m happy to see the redesign, and it appears to be faster, I’m a little dissapointed in the table-based layout. If ESPN and the Kansas City Chief’s web site can use CSS for layout, there’s no reason why CNN couldn’t either.

Still, I see a significant speed improvement in load times.

By: Keith Burgin

Keith Burgin — Sun, 19 Jun 2005 23:38:05 +0000

Eric –

I rarely watch network or cable news, and when I want to know multiple sides of an issue, I search news.google.com and look at multiple sides. The big three are next to worthless.

By: Hebron

Hebron — Sun, 19 Jun 2005 15:03:26 +0000

Nah, it’s fixed width, leaving a huge chunk of white and using pixel-sized fonts. Same goes for the two other news sites, is it so hard to flow the layout?

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Sun, 19 Jun 2005 10:11:22 +0000

Ian raised an excellent point. The BBC gives a more digestable chunk. Need we also discuss feeds from CNN compred with the BBC? I am subscribed to various feeds from both. In CNN: user hits title, “No description available”. Now that’s useful, right? Why even syndicate if the subscriber gets 2-word provocative titles? The BBC is different, possibly because it has no commercial interests (ads). It also opened its news API to the public recently.

By: Eric Meyer

Eric Meyer — Sun, 19 Jun 2005 04:11:32 +0000

That confusion comes from watching CNN. It will pass, my friend.

Yeah, getting balanced reporting looking at multiple sides of a story does tend to leave one more confused than the heavily one-sided stuff you get elsewhere.

Actually, I kid—I don’t watch CNN. Or Fox, or MSNBC, or the “Big Three”, or…

By: Keith Burgin

Keith Burgin — Sun, 19 Jun 2005 03:35:42 +0000

Wait, I”m confused– when you say that, are you talking about CNN or Fox News?

That confusion comes from watching CNN. It will pass, my friend.

By: Josh

Josh — Sun, 19 Jun 2005 01:52:42 +0000

The Sydney Morning Herald appears to still be ahead of the crowd! How large media organisations can redesign in 2005 whilst still using tables as the foundation of their design... eugh! Visually I prefer the SMH website over those of most other media organisations, too, although Australia's publicly-owned ABC radio and television network is also standards compliant and visually not-too-bad.

By: Ian Cheung

Ian Cheung — Sun, 19 Jun 2005 00:54:49 +0000

Maybe I’m biased but I still prefer the layout of the BBC News site. With the CNN site there is too much happening below “the fold”. Still it could be a cultural thing.

By: Eric Meyer

Eric Meyer — Sat, 18 Jun 2005 22:36:50 +0000

Now if they could only work on the content.

Wait, I’m confused– when you say that, are you talking about CNN or Fox News?

By: Keith Burgin

Keith Burgin — Sat, 18 Jun 2005 21:50:34 +0000

Like you, I detest the new format that FoxNews is using. It’s clutter, popups, and force-feeding. CNN’s new look is definitely an improvement. Now if they could only work on the content.

By: Amber

Amber — Sat, 18 Jun 2005 21:16:49 +0000

63 errors? Come on now. I’m as much of a purist as the next guy, but for a big site like CNN, that’s nothing. (No, I’m not justifying it… I know there are plenty of big sites that validate, and I think every site should validate.. I’m just sayin’.)

By: Will Kessel

Will Kessel — Sat, 18 Jun 2005 20:17:32 +0000

Here's their validation report. Ick.