This is the criticism, apparently: "The typography of a newspaper is its DNA...the one thing that's unique to that publication."
-
-
-
Pretty over-dramatic, IMO. A newspaper's DNA is its reporting. If that's good, the typography is basically meaningless.
-
Oooh, yikes. cc:
@fvigeland -
(I don't totally disagree, but that is a


take.) -
I should preemptively walk back a bit. Typography not totally meaningless. I just found that criticism to be so dumb.
-
Reality is, people don't like change. Elevating typography to "a newspaper's DNA" just a way of masquerading that as some kind of pathos.
-
Lukewarm take: Typography is a facet of style that can be important to characterizing an outlet, but is not the dominant part of identity.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Feels less personal.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.