Cyberpresse today went live with a redesign of its entire site, ditching the old coloured box motif in favour of a grey, white and red OMGWEB2.0 deal that seems to be in vogue with media sites recently.
The first thing you notice, as you do with all these new news websites, is that it goes on forever. You see, some web marketing genius decreed that users no longer care about vertical scrolling (which is true) and some web designer at an important media outlet decided this meant the homepage should be infinitely long vertically. And now everyone is mindlessly copying each other with these layouts that have no structure and look absolutely haphazard as far as placement of stories on the homepage:
Still with me? Good. Since the page is so freaking long, I had to shrink it down considerably, so let's take a zoomed-in look here:
It's a very boring, unoriginal layout. Some account-specific links at the top, then a horizontal bar for links to individual sections. Oh wait, it's actually two horizontal bars. One is for sections, the other is for "websites" that Cyberpresse owns for sections special enough to get their own domain. If you're not familiar with that system, you'll probably get confused here and have to read the entire thing a couple of times to figure out which link is the best one to click on. Below that are main stories on the left, a search box on the right and some editor's picks. Looks OK so far.
Here's the meat below. It goes on like this for about four or five screens worth, and they're all basically the same. Can you tell the logic behind what goes in which columns?
If you answered anything coherent to that question, then you're wrong. The first column has sections like news and business, except for fluff sections like home, auto, environment, movies that are in the second column, except for arts, technology and lifestyles which are back in the first column.
Oh, and they have names like "Automobile" and "Maison" even though their names are "Mon Volant" and "Mon Toit" elsewhere. Whatever, consistency is for losers.
The third column at least has some consistency. It's where all the interactive stuff goes. The polls, the "most emailed stories," the user-generated content, etc. In fact, you're encouraged to submit your own content (click on "Soumettre une nouvelle," a page I can't link to directly), which requires you fill out a form and agree to an 800-word terms of service (which I also can't link to directly) with gems like these:
- Lorsque vous soumettez Votre contenu à Cyberpresse, vous concédez à Cyberpresse une licence mondiale illimitée, irrévocable, non exclusive, perpétuelle et à titre gratuit : i) d’utilisation, de reproduction, de stockage, d’adaptation, de traduction, de modification, de création d’œuvres dérivés, de transmission, de distribution, d’exécution publique ou de mise à la disposition du public de Votre contenu à quelque fin; et ii) de concession en sous licence à des tiers du droit illimité d’exercer l’un ou l’autre des droits précités. Outre la concession de la licence susmentionnée, par les présentes, vous i) convenez de renoncer à l’ensemble des droits moraux dans Votre contenu en faveur de Cyberpresse; ii) reconnaissez et convenez que Cyberpresse ne saurait être tenue responsable de quelque perte, endommagement ou corruption de Votre Contenu; et iii) reconnaissez et convenez que Votre Contenu sera considéré comme non confidentiel.
- Vous devez être âgés de 14 ans ou plus afin de pouvoir soumettre Votre Contenu à Cyberpresse.
- Les Règles de Contributions des Utilisateurs peuvent être modifiées en tout temps par Cyberpresse à son entière discrétion.
- Vous vous engagez à coopérer avec nous dans la contestation de toute réclamation.
Well, when you put it that way...
One thing the website emphasizes is its Dossiers, in which stories on a single topic are packaged together, like the U.S. presidential election. Organizing stories by topic instead of more broadly by section is something you'd think media web types would have concluded long ago was boneheadedly obvious, but the news sites are only now really picking up on that. And there are plenty of important, recent topics that don't have their own pages yet and really should.
Cyberpresse's launch article also mentions a more powerful (i.e. less crappy) search engine that better finds what you're looking for. I typed in "Patrick Lagacé" and was pleasantly surprised to see a photo, biography and even email link. Except nowhere do I find a link to his blog. I tried again with "Patrick Lagacé blogue" and the response was "Aucun résultat." Bravo.
Putting in other search terms for important stories of the past few weeks, I become even less impressed with the search engine.
The blogs also got a redesign. The authors' pictures are moved to the side, leaving a big space for "le blogue de X"in stylized letters. (Though it seems poor Sophie Cousineau and Nelson Dumais got left behind.) These designs range from the obvious clichés to the we-don't-know-who-this-is-or-what-she-writes-about generic.
Finally, there's the RSS page, which has lots more feeds for specific topics. This is good, though the wording on many of these feeds is strange and confusing (what does "ctrl::dossiers cbp" mean?). I managed to decode a few of them which have been added to my Google Reader.
And now, the really bad intro videos
Oh, and I just noticed there's a video tour of the new website (honestly folks, if you have to give a video demonstration of how your website works so people understand it, then you didn't design it properly in the first place). I say "just noticed" because the article announcing the new website has no link to the videos nor does it even mention them.
The videos star some tech dude or blogger I've never heard of. His intro video is unintentionally hilarious, as he invites people to see another video "en cliquant ici" (clicking on the video per his instruction does nothing), and then sits there and does nothing but stare at the computer screen for a minute and a half while we make up our minds.
In fact, it goes on for so long that he twice looks off camera wondering if he can stop yet:
The content of the video is basically him repeating the same thing that was in the introductory article, although he strokes his ego by using himself as a search example. Even though he got the same result I did (i.e. a picture of himself but no link to his blog), he pretends that it works.