NYT LeBron sports front

The HOF front sucked, too.

 

It's factually inaccurate and the equivalent of the designer jerking off on the page. Other than that, I really like it. Seeing it receive praise among media people is discouraging.

 

Interesting. Did Chris Bosh's?

 

The HOF page told a story with its design, whether you hated it or not. This doesn't accomplish that.

 

No. Because's Bosh news was sourced. Nothing from Bosh or an agent or a GM.

LeBron news came from LeBron, with affirmation from executives in Miami and Cleveland.

 

If it was the front of a wraparound section to the main section, that's one thing. But as your main front? Nope.

 

And in the all-time hypocrisy list, this has to rate high: questioning the ethics of SI on the story while you run a factually incorrect agate list as your sports cover: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/12/sports/basketball/role-of-sports-illustrated-in-lebron-jamess-announcement-raises-journalistic-questions.html?smid=tw-nytmedia&seid=auto&_r=3

 

Perfectly put.

Out of all the millions of words in stories, features, columns and analysis, from a gaggle of staffers and other wires, on the decision, how it was made and what the ripple effect will be throughout the NBA, with probably thousands of photos at its disposal, the exalted NYT chose this as the best way to deliver that content to its readers.

Shitty from beginning to end.

 

Ding. Ding. Ding. We have a winner.

This whole design concept is not a representation of the day's news; it is an editorial opinion statement about national (mainly ESPN) 24/7 coverage of LBJ. And that's not what the front page is supposed to be. Especially when Knicks have a player of great significance with his own decision pending.

 

Here's a version of transactions that moved Friday, but I do not know when, probably later in the day/night, http://www.sfchronicle.com/sports/article/Friday-s-Sports-Transactions-5616717.php

The New York Times should be the sports editor available for questioning and this is something the public editor should deal with.

 

This is a great comment. The business has turned into a "look at how smart and edgy we are" proposition as opposed to a "serve the reader" business. Someone really needs to explain to me how that serves the reader.

The designer and the editor who approved it both fall into the "look at me!!" category.