Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
05.07.2008 4:00 am

Frequently asked questions about the new STLtoday

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Thanks for visiting our FAQ about the new STLtoday. We hope the answers below help clear up any questions you have about the site. But if not, there’s contact info listed below — and we encourage you to post your comments on the bottom of this page. And don’t forget to see the video tour of the news site here.

UPDATE: Here’s an update on the progress we made today on addressing some the concerns you raised (and we noticed) on the site redesign. Now, back to your regularly scheduld FAQ….

Why did you redesign STLtoday?

Frankly, we had some spring cleaning to do. STLtoday has grown a lot in the past few years, with lots of new features, more content and more interactivity. We had to reorganize, dust off some hidden gems and get rid of some junk. The time was right. Our last major redesign was in late 2002. Subsequent upgrades and improvements helped - but we needed a major change.

The reasons? There were several.

1) Ease of reading and navigating. With so much content on STLtoday, we needed to rethink how readers navigate the site — and we needed to make it easier. We’ve added several features to improve the navigation. We also wanted to air out the pages a little to make them a little easier on the eyes and to help establish a better hierarchy of information.

2) Highlight the community. We’re amping up the opportunities for you to voice your opinion, share your photos, videos and ideas throughout our entire site. We want to make it easier for people like you to tell us what you think about the latest news, our coverage and to share your interests and life with us and the St. Louis community.

3) Breaking news. With this redesign of the website, we’re also redesigning how our newsroom works — even how it’s physically arranged — to make the web a higher priority. We’ll be posting more updates throughout the day, around the clock and earlier than ever before. So be sure to check back regularly throughout the day because the stories and features will be constantly updating and changing. We are going to focus on, not only the most important breaking news, but also looking out for your interests — for instance, leading up to the weekends, we’ll be highlighting the best events you can go and enjoy; around lunchtime we’ll showcase cool places to eat; and when major news breaks, we’ll blow out the entire top of our homepage to give you the fastest, most engaging and comprehensive information about our local community.

4) Expanded content. STLtoday has grown a lot in the past few years — and so has our audience. We produce, and you expect, more video, more audio, more slideshows and more interactivity. We were busting our britches trying to squeeze in all the new features. Now, we can better display it, and more easily help you find it.

What are the most important changes in this redesign?

1) Better navigation. We’ve improved the navigation throughout the site. You may have already noticed the “drop-down” navigation across the top of every page of the site. Point your mouse at “news,” for example, and and entire menu of options from the news channel will pop before your eyes. From there, you can easily scoot directly to Bill McClellan’s column, or to your favorite blog or news section. You may also notice that there are several ways to get to different topics; we’re doing our best to let you get around with as few barriers as possible.

2) Improved readability. We’ve softened the colors and opened up more white space on most of the pages. We’ve also changed the fonts for our headline and body type to make them easier to read.

3) “The Belt.” Scroll about halfway down most of our section fronts and the STLtoday home page and you’ll see a feature we fondly refer to as “The Belt.” It’s a strip of 12 “online extras,” special features we want our readers to able to find easily. Watch for those to change regularly.

4) Today’s paper. Toward the top of every page on the site you’ll find these words: “Find it in today’s St. Louis Post-Dispatch.” That link will take you to a list of stories from the current day’s newspaper. So, for instance, if you want to send a story to a friend, just click on that and you’ll find the entire contents of the print paper organized by section and page.

5) New channels. Regular readers may notice the new “Multimedia” and “Interact” channels on STLtoday. We hope that’ll help you find some of the web-specific content we’re producing in the Post-Dispatch newsroom — and that you’re sharing with fellow readers.

What’s the best way to navigate STLtoday now?

Get to know the drop-down navigation across the top of every page on the site. Mouse over a channel name (i.e. news or sports, etc.) and a menu of options will pop up. You’ll be able to go directly to another section of the site, or zip directly to a specific column, blog, forum or other feature on the site.

Play around with the tabs that you’ll find on many of the pages. You’ll see on the sports pages, for example, that you may be able to flip quickly from Bernie Miklasz’s latest column to Bryan Burwell’s.

Note the “most popular” boxes that you’ll find on many of our pages, including the home page. That gives you a peek inside the mind of readers: Which stories did they click on the most, or e-mail to a friend most often?

You’ll find those boxes on most of our story pages, too.

I love/hate the design; who will listen?

Change can be difficult. We get it. So if there’s something we’ve just completely missed, we want to hear about it. You can comment on here (see the comment form at the bottom of this page) and read other readers’ comments; or send an e-mail to sitehelp@stltoday.com.

And, hey, if you like the changes, you’re welcome to tell us that, too!

Something just doesn’t….uh, look right about the new site. What’s up?

You know, it’s absolutely possible that some things in your browser look a little, shall we say, askew. We’re happy to hear about those, of course, so please let us know. But another thing to consider is this: Our site is designed to look best when you’re using Internet Explorer 7 or Firefox 2 as your web browser. Those are the most current version of those browsers. If you want to download them, click the links.

How do I find stories that ran in the Post-Dispatch newspaper?

Toward the top of every page on the site you’ll find these words: “Find it in today’s St. Louis Post-Dispatch.” That link will take you to a list of stories from the current day’s newspaper.

Where are funeral notices and news obituaries?

Obits are available in the top navigation if you roll your mouse over news, then select “Obits.” Also, At the bottom of every page on the site you’ll find quick links to some important and popular features. There’s a link to “obituaries” there. That takes you to the page of paid funeral notices from the Post-Dispatch. From that page, you’ll also find a link to the news obituaries written by reporters in the Post-Dispatch newsroom and the Associated Press.

What hasn’t changed?

There’s a lot that’s the same. We haven’t taken away any of the content we did the day before the site was redesigned. All the features you’re used to finding in news, sports, entertainment, lifestyle and business are still available.

Where’s the stuff that was in earlier editions of the newspaper?

Remember that link we talked about earlier, the one that says “Find it in today’s St. Louis Post-Dispatch.” Well, you can find links to the stories in the previous seven day’s worth of the Post-Dispatch, too. Look for the list of previous days in the top right column of that page.

How about searching the Post-Dispatch archives?

Check the bottom of every page for a list of quick links. You’ll find it there.

What’s the “Interact” channel all about?

Interact is a new channel on STLtoday designed to highlight your photos, videos, thoughts on news stories and community participation. For example, hundreds of readers contribute new captions to each week’s Punch Line cartoon by R.J. Matson. We wanted to be able to highlight R.J.’s cartoons and your contributions better.

Interact is also the new home of the editorial page features — editorials, letters, and commentaries. Why? Because those opinion-based features lend themselves well to reader interaction — and we want to encourage the dialog between our staff and all the readers.

What’s the “Multimedia” channel all about?

Increasingly, the Post-Dispatch’s journalists are using more video, audio, photo slideshows, games, animations and interactive databases and maps to report the news. The Multimedia channel gives us a place to showcase some of the best of that work — from serious, multi-day multimedia projects such as Free to Flee — a project investigating felons ability to evade the law — to fun and entertaining multimedia pieces such as “The Dead Quiz” — about scary movies. This channel takes reporting and storytelling to a new level.

What’s that big orange logo at the bottom of all the pages?

That big orange logo can save you lots of time if you surf the web often — it’s the universal logo for RSS. You’d know a stop sign without the words, right? Well, this is a universal symbol for “RSS feeds.” RSS stands for “really simple syndication” and gives readers the chance to subscribe to specific types of stories that interest you as soon as their published. You won’t need to check the website everyday, we’ll let you know when we publish new content! Click the icon and read more about RSS or watch this video.

What’s the deal with the strip of pictures in the middle of the home page?

Scroll about halfway down most of our section fronts (and the STLtoday home page) and you’ll see a feature we fondly refer to as “The Belt.” It’s a strip of 12 “online extras,” special features we want our readers to able to find easily. Watch for those to change regularly. Click the arrows on either side of The Belt to scroll to the next set of four items.

What happened to religion coverage?

All our top-flight religion coverage is still there. Technically, we’ve moved it from “news” to “life & style,” but you can find it from either section, using that spiffy drop-down navigation we mentioned earlier. Don’t forget to check out our new blog (we just started it a couple of weeks ago) called “Civil Religion,” featuring voices from a variety of faith traditions around the St. Louis area.

What happened to the world and national news pages?

Over the years, we’ve noticed that STLtoday.com readers respond mostly to local news — but we know national and world news is also important to readers. We consolidated the coverage of national and world news onto one page, pointing to the top headlines around the globe. We’ve also added a new feature by creating regular photo galleries of images from around the world and national news events.

Why are there so many photos?

If an image is worth a thousand words, we have a gazillion — because they’re peppered all over the site. With this redesign, we’ve reworked how we create and share photo galleries. We’re going to be producing many, many more photo galleries on a daily basis.

We’re also going to be regularly creating new photo galleries from:

- iParty event and party photos from the social scene around town.

- News photos from around the world.

- Sports photos from around the world.

- Celebrity and entertainment photos from around the world.

And we’ll still keep producing photo galleries from events like Cards games to May Day, as we always have.

With the new galleries, there’s also of new functionality you might appreciate — from the ability to quickly e-mail photos to friends, to the ability to purchase prints on every Post-Dispatch staff produced image.

We’ve know there’s many of you out there who love viewing photos as much as we do and we have a new photo blog called PICTURES where the Post-Dispatch’s photo staff will talk about and share stories behind the visuals in the paper and on the web site.

There’s a lot of you who also enjoy taking photos as much as we do, so we’ve highlighted our iWitness photo galleries throughout the entire site so you can more easily view and share your photos.

Why didn’t you fix your site search?

Good question. We know it needs work. Fixing it is harder than you might think, but we’re working on it. Thanks for your patience.

Why would I want to register with your site?

There’s a bunch of reasons. Maybe you frequent our blogs and love to comment on them. Registering means you don’t have to deal with typing random letters and numbers from that pesky “anti-spam” image that’s required if you’re not registered. Posting comments in the forums requires registering. You’ll have easier access to our contests and you can sign up for our newsletters, including the popular 3 O’Clock Stir, the daily Cardinals Update and more.

Where is weather?

That hasn’t changed! You can still find a link to the weather in the upper right corner of the page. Or go directly to STLtoday.com/weather.

What is the Marketplace?

It’s a great place to buy stuff. Visit the Marketplace to see Post-Dispatch newspaper ads, review special advertising sections, get ideas about local professional services and buy Post-Dispatch photos and other merchandise.

Where are Classified Ads/Bargain Box?

The classified index is now at the top of the new Marketplace page. From that index, you can click on Bargain Box as well as other categories of classified ads.

How do I contact a reporter?

Look at the “Contact Us” link in the bottom of every page. That’ll drive you to our help page, where you can find contact information for STLtoday, the Post-Dispatch and the Suburban Journals.

How do I write a letter to the editor?

There’s links on the Letters to the Editor page, the Editorial page and the Interact page. But honestly, here’s a tip: Just e-mail letters@post-dispatch.com.

I want to place a classified ad/a display ad on STLtoday/an ad in the Post-Dispatch. How do I do that?

Check out the bottom of every page again. You’ll find a “help” link. On that page, you’ll find a big, bold header that says “Advertising.” That’s links to all the information you’ll need.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (4 votes, average: 2 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...
206 comments

Comments are closed.

I read STLtoday every day from my new home in NYC. I have to say - the new layout is NOT a good thing. Its unnattractive to the eye, looks more like People magazine than a news site. I am very disappointed, and might discontinue my reading. I can’t stand how it looks

— kch
8:08 am May 7th, 2008

This is one of the major newspapers in the country and the website now appears to be established by a kindergartner. The design is very poor and does not lead to enhanced navigation. Good thing all I really care about is the sports.

— Matt
8:16 am May 7th, 2008

Every time I click to read a story or go to another page another ad pops up…what a disaster.

— john
8:16 am May 7th, 2008

Seems to me that we readers should give this new ‘look and feel’ a bit of time. Like everything else in life, it needs getting used to, I think. For what it’s worth, I kind of like the new look.

— STLron
8:21 am May 7th, 2008

What a mess! Why didn’t you put somebody in charge who actually reads the webpage so they would know what would work. I’ve already added ksdk to my favorites and removed stltoday. We want to be able to see the main stories of each section on one page! Fire the webmaster and put it the way it was!

— al
8:25 am May 7th, 2008

Hahahaha. I think you guys are seriously in need of some designers. Even Springfield’s News-Leader has a better site — http://news-leader.com.

Turqoise and Red. Sweet.

— Nick
8:30 am May 7th, 2008

I hate this new site. What ever happened to if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. I guess I need to find a new site to get the news.

— Dave
8:30 am May 7th, 2008

Sorry that link didn\’t work

http://news-leader.com

Also love the giant RSS button at the bottom. Can you guys just copy off a successful website. NY Times? Jeez…

— Nick
8:33 am May 7th, 2008

STLRon: Thanks for the vote of confidence. We do appreciate the feedback from everyone. John, I’ll check to see if the ad thing you mentioned is a fluke.

— Kurt Greenbaum
8:34 am May 7th, 2008

I have a fairly small computer monitor. It takes a while for me to scroll from the top of the page before I can even read a headline. And the images and text is are enormous. Blind people have screen readers, please don’t make it unusable for everyone else.

And yes, that is an enormous RSS icon.

— Tom
8:44 am May 7th, 2008

I especially like how the page jumps when you click the slide show topics, or any of the controls. Nice! That IS better navigation.

— Jookie
8:50 am May 7th, 2008

wow, this is actually worse than the last re-design. i honestly think you’re trying to make the website unreadable in the hopes that people would rather buy the paper than visit the website.

— nick
8:52 am May 7th, 2008

Site enhancements are Great! I check it all day from Atlanta!

— Lou
8:53 am May 7th, 2008

Does there have to be so much crap “above the fold”: a big banner ad, a weather box, a huge stltoday logo, a Yahoo search bar, and all that white space? You have to scroll down to even see the lede. The color scheme is also pretty vomitous - how is teal better than navy blue? The old site certainly needed better navigation and bigger photos, but it looks like stltoday missed the mark yet again.

— southsidered
8:54 am May 7th, 2008

I like how you wish to “highlight the community” with the video of American Idol on the home page… oh wait.

— Jookie
8:55 am May 7th, 2008

oh and also:
z-index. learn it. love it. there is no reason why your flash banners should cover up the drop-down nav.

— nick
8:55 am May 7th, 2008

Was this designed tested and used by anybody before its implementation?

How about a toned down, text only version.

Have you viewed the page from a mobile device?

Who choose the color scheme?

You might want to rethink the design. It has the look and feel of a ‘myspace’ page. Not a new site.

— reader
8:59 am May 7th, 2008

It’s official! St. Louis web design has died in a pastel-gradient-overuseofjavascript-can’t escape from freddy krueger nightmare.

— Jookie
9:00 am May 7th, 2008

I thought the old site was poorly organized, but this is even worse. The font is huge (actually making it more awkward to read) and the colors are awful. Check out some successful papers (NY, Chicago Tribune) and work from their templates. I don’t think I’ll ever come to this new site. Oh, and a decent mobile version would be a step in the right direction - this is the 21st century!

— MJ
9:01 am May 7th, 2008

Thanks, Nick, for your time. We appreciate the feedback. As you might imagine, bugs happen and we’ll be working on stamping them out.

— Kurt Greenbaum
9:01 am May 7th, 2008

For those of us without huge monitors, the new site is REALLY difficult to use. Everything is so spread out, you have to scroll sideways, as well up-and-down, all the time. Have someone in your office trying using the site on a 17-inch monitor and see what I mean. As a former St. Louisan living in a very Cubs-centric town, I need your site to help keep up with the Cardinals, and this is very disappointing.

— alice.rudolph
9:04 am May 7th, 2008

Do you have a “how to make information impossible to find” study group? If so they did a great job. Every new iteration of stltoday.com makes it less news and more glitz. I’m disappointed agian.

— K
9:11 am May 7th, 2008

Well.. my wife has been tring to get me to use myfoxstl.com for awhile now and I told her I like stltoday.com better. But I guess after today, I will follow her there.

— Jay
9:13 am May 7th, 2008

Is there a way to make the posts appear cheesier? I mean more than putting those horrid, huge quotation marks images on each one?

— Jookie
9:13 am May 7th, 2008

This is awful. Whoever designed this should now submit their resignation and change careers. Please.

— Smitty1179
9:15 am May 7th, 2008

Well the writing has always been terrible at the Post at least now the site design matches.

— Nick
9:16 am May 7th, 2008

Alice: Thanks for your note about the screen size. I understand, but this page is actually optimized for the screen sizes most of our readers use.

Reader: Yes, we tested it. Things always need to be tweaked in a live environment, so we’re happy to have feedback.

To those of you asking about a mobile version, I agree. Wish we had one too, but it’s a still-to-come feature.

— Kurt Greenbaum
9:17 am May 7th, 2008

I think the site redesign is an improvement. The old site was feeling a bit dated. It will take a while for people to get used to it, it takes some time to find your old favorites, but I’m sure subsequent visits get easier. I use firefox and the new design, so far, fixes all the annoyances I had with the old site.

My only quibble is with the tiffany blue gradient, but I’m sure there were good reasons to pick the color scheme.

— Jeremiah
9:19 am May 7th, 2008

Alice in other words we don’t really care about you!
Kurt nice remark, I guess you were the man in charge!

— al
9:20 am May 7th, 2008

So…I’m assuming the new STLToday.com was only “tested” in Netscape 2.0 on a PowerMac in 1997, since it has soooo many issues in other “small time” browsers like… oh, I don’t know… IE, Firefox.

— Jookie
9:22 am May 7th, 2008

I like the look of the redesign, but it’s too buggy to be sure if it works. I can’t find any columnists. When I click on a columnist, I get an intro, but no column. Then the navagation bar on that page is all goofy.

A lot of links are all messed up too, so I can’t find any stories.

Hope you get the kinks worked out soon.

— Denise
9:22 am May 7th, 2008

What about the other 49% of users? Just because you designed for the majority it doesn’t mean you should cut off the rest of the users.

— Chris
9:24 am May 7th, 2008

Did you think to have some of your everyday readers look over this format?? Apparently not. Very difficult to read, hard for your eye to follow the page. Basically poor design.

— Greg
9:25 am May 7th, 2008

So Kurt… why does your name appear at the bottom of the page, below the footer? Are you promoting a book?

— Jookie
9:26 am May 7th, 2008

Your reasons for the redesign are good. The end result, however, is not. The font is too big and hard for my, and my fiance’s eye to read. While your aim was to better organize data you’ve made the common web air of too much at once. By putting everything in your navigation bar and on your main pages you overwhelm the reader and make nothing easy to find. Seems like a bunch of tables and columns all of which take forever (compared to the old version) to load on my computer…. Now Bernie might have to add a concession to his articles…. “Reading time 3 minutes (after you find out where to start)” Nice thought… perhaps more testing is in order before the big implementation. Good luck with the fix… Right now it’s about even with http://www.siude.com the student newspaper for SIU Carbondale.

— Tim
9:27 am May 7th, 2008

Except for the terrible slowness of the PD website I didn’t have any problems getting the information I needed. Now I can’t do a keyword search that really helped me get the news I was looking for. Too many times these “new & improved” projects are designed because they look good on a performance evaluation rather that to address a real need. We’ve all been there! Joanne

— Joanne
9:28 am May 7th, 2008

The redesign is great, I love it! Keep up the great work.

— dwit67
9:29 am May 7th, 2008

Thanks, Denise. We’re aware of the problem with columnists. So, we’re working on that one.

— Kurt Greenbaum
9:32 am May 7th, 2008

Jookie! Ha! I’m wondering the same thing. It’s on the list of bugs. No, alas, I am not promoting a book. But thanks for asking. :)

— Kurt Greenbaum
9:33 am May 7th, 2008

Hey, I love the sitemap. It’s very helpful. Where else can I find a page that states “TBD?” Seriously… why even post a page with no information on it? This reminds me back in the early days of the Internet when you’d go to an “Order Now” page, only to get a form you’d need to print and mail. I guess the rationale was “Hey, we should really have a sitemap page. I know we don’t have any content to put on it, but everyone else has one. Wait, I just had a brilliant idea. Write the letters TBD on it and no one will be any the wiser.”

— Jookie
9:36 am May 7th, 2008

also you guys still haven’t learned your lesson about margins around ads and photos in articles. for the past two years this has driven me crazy. every article you read the copy butts right up against any ad or pic.

i’m looking at bernie’s column today and it’s just laid out horribly. look at the flash ad halfway down and how the copy rubs right up against it. you need to add “margin-right: 10px;” to your inline style, buddy. but since this was never a concern with the last “re-design” i’m assuming it will never be implemented. and we in stl will have to cringe every time we point friends and family to an article on stltoday.com

— nick
9:37 am May 7th, 2008

The more I see of this website, the more I want to cry.

— James
9:38 am May 7th, 2008

@Jookie — I think the site map is just the nav. Have you seen how many links they’ve stuffed into that blue thing? Holy crap.

— Nick
9:38 am May 7th, 2008

Jookie. We know about the sitemap problem. Thanks for mentioning it. On the list of fixes.

— Kurt Greenbaum
9:41 am May 7th, 2008

I can’t believe you guys thought you could change something in St. Louis and not hear the riot act read to you a thousand times. This area is highly resistant to change. I can tell by many of the hairstyles.

After spending a few minutes navigating around, I think the website looks much better. The old one looked like a bunch of generic columns and tables that anyone with a one day html course could generate. All the links to everything are right at the tabs on the top. I just think those tabs (news, business, sports, entertainment, etc) should LOOK like tabs, so it’s obvious. I’ve clicked on a dozen stories and not had one add pop up.

— b
9:41 am May 7th, 2008

@Nick - Ah yes, true. But you get the added “feature” of the IE IFRAME “fix” which completely renders the navigation unusable and unreadable. As you know, the release of IE7 addressed that whole thing.

View in IE: http://www.stltoday.com/sitemap

— Jookie
9:43 am May 7th, 2008

In a word: Pathetic. What a tremendous mistake. I know I won’t be returning. It was so much easier to find the news in your old format. Now I have huge photos overtaking my screen, 18 pt. type, massive logos, it’s ridiculous. You’ve done your internet readers a huge disservice if this is how you see keeping things fresh. You must be trying to embrace an older readership with such huge type, most browsers have the ability to increase the point size. Very disappointing.

— Bill Beard
9:46 am May 7th, 2008

Please, please, please put it back the way it was. This is a mess. It’s sensory overload. If you goal was to make navigation easier, you’ve failed miserably.

— Charles Mosley
9:48 am May 7th, 2008

I know it’s already been said, but WOW… that’s a huge RSS button!

— Jookie
9:57 am May 7th, 2008

Please choose a new font. The current font is not very readable because of it’s wide spacing and open letters. Also, when I’m in a story the tabs at the top don’t work. When I mouse over them I get horiz and vert scroll bars and the window stays the size of the original tab. That’s kind of a huge bug!

— Amy in StL
10:03 am May 7th, 2008

I do NOT like the redesign of the website at all. I liked the old way. I thought the old layout was sooooo much easier to use. It was easy to find the headlines in the paper and to find certain sections of the paper. This new layout is so hard to read and navigate it makes me not want to read the paper online anymore. I am a big fan of getting my news online, but this new layout/site will not encourage me to do so. I don’t want to have to go searching for things, I think it right there on the homepage. If something catches my eye, I will click the link and read it then. PLEASE GO BACK TO THE PREVIOUS VERSION!

— Julie
10:04 am May 7th, 2008

How do I find the editorial page/letters to the editor, etc.?

— Dan Duncan
10:11 am May 7th, 2008

First, a couple of compliments:

1) I like the layout much better, feels much more modern.
2) The greater use of whitespace and larger font size is nice.

And of course, a couple of complaints:

1) The front page uses a lot of vertical space before getting to the actual news. Then there is the “community voices” sections, followed by the crazy tabbed sections. Finally, we get to more news. Move the “community voices” section down.

2) Please can we have an AJAX based comments system. I don’t want to reload the page and scroll to the bottom to see the next page of comments.

3) Teal? Really? You went from a red color scheme to a teal color scheme. Teal doesn’t feel right at all on a news website…

— Phillip
10:24 am May 7th, 2008

Dan: Thank you for your question. We’ll be taking steps to make the placement of Editorials and Letters to the Editor clearer. For now, look in the drop-down navigation either under News (”Extras”) or Interact. There are also short URLs for both: STLtoday.com/editorial and STLtoday.com/letters. Thank you for asking.

— Kurt Greenbaum
10:27 am May 7th, 2008

Phillip: Thanks for your comments. I can assure you the designers are seeing them. And as for the teal….again, I didn’t do the design and I don’t have an eye for that kind of thing…but I think it’s funny: I used to live in South Florida where we watched the Marlins win two World Series. I am certain that had nothing to do with us moving away from Cardinal red. :)

— Kurt Greenbaum
10:30 am May 7th, 2008

Not loving it. I keep the website up as my home page so I can glance over during the day to get updates. The huge revolving picture drives me crazy. The whole page is bland and too busy. I will find something else.

— Deb Kleinschmidt
10:31 am May 7th, 2008

W3C Validation Output: 322 Errors. yikes. not even close to valid.

— Chuck
10:32 am May 7th, 2008

I like the way you have redsigned the site. I hope, also, that there are more sensible and less obnoxious posts in the forums. The forum for Jeff Gordon’s Tipsheet was getting too many jerks with obscene and scatalogical comments. One poster kept making a joke over last year’s local tragedy by identifying himself, “Josh ‘I’m Sloshed’ Hancock”.

— eldonaldo
10:34 am May 7th, 2008

Deb: Thank you for your comment. Perhaps this will help: You can pause the slideshow so it doesn’t automatically rotate. The controls are at the bottom right of that section. You can also advance the pictures “manually.”

— Kurt Greenbaum
10:34 am May 7th, 2008

Functionally the new design is fine, but aesthetically…wow. It looks like a pre-school or elementary school site. If you’re gonna go with the red/white/black thing that makes sense and looks sharp. However, PLEASE get rid of the teal sidebars! They are truly awful!

— Kyle
10:38 am May 7th, 2008

Kurt - Wow, when reading the above forums my immediate thought was “What a bunch of crybabies”. Personally, I love the new website and thought the old one was out of date compared to others around the country. There are always growing pains, I suppose, but change can sometimes be a good thing. Thanks for the fresh new website and keep up the good work! Tuck.

— Tuck
10:38 am May 7th, 2008

Tuck: That is very kind of you to say. Thank you.

— Kurt Greenbaum
10:43 am May 7th, 2008

The design is fabulous–I like the increased white space, makes it friendlier to the eye and easier to read.

— Bitsy
10:53 am May 7th, 2008

great job. So much less cluttered.

I like the faux quotes and the focus on reader interaction. Nicely done.

One thing, can you make the ‘new’ tag on stories a different color, I really liked that.

— sparky
10:54 am May 7th, 2008

Hate it!!! Time and time again it is proven… You shouln’t frak with a good thing. Go back to the old layout or lose a reader.

— Matt
10:59 am May 7th, 2008

I have browsed around the new look and I like it. I will miss seeing a long list of headlines on the home page, but it’s a change I can live with. One thing that should definately be on the home page is the Talk of the Day blog. To me, if it really is the talk of the day, then it should be in a prominent, easily accessible place.

— jfmoyn
11:08 am May 7th, 2008

I’m sorry, but this redesign is bad. It looks like it was done by amateurs. Too much whitespace, lousy fonts, and navigation is attrocious. You really need to rethink this design.

— Greg
11:16 am May 7th, 2008

Looks like you might need to update your foul language filter. And I thought the people on TOTD were cranky! I had no idea.

— jfmoyn
11:17 am May 7th, 2008

I always have to chuckle when a company insists that it knows what is best for its customers, even though the customers express their displeasure. Who do you think will get the blame when readership dips???? The customers who aren’t “savvy enough” of course!

— Skip Lewandowski
11:19 am May 7th, 2008

STLtoday - Nice website! I’m surprised by all the complaining but then i started looking at the names and realized its mainly the same people. Don’t they have jobs?

Folks around here always need something to complain about don’t they? If you gave them a free ham and cheese sandwich, they’d gripe that the cheese was on the bottom and not the top (but they’d still eat it).

So give them a month and they won’t want to return to the old site. They’ll just complain about another change if you do.

— Bruce
11:29 am May 7th, 2008

Can’t find a damn thing.
Obviously, you got a snot nose 20 something that don’t care about content, just eye candy.

— Tom Duerbusch
11:32 am May 7th, 2008

Absolutely terrible. Cluttered and unorganized. I love having to click five times to get a story I used to get with one click. Terrible. If you want to use fancy graphics, fine, but go back to the old one page layout.

— Jerry
11:34 am May 7th, 2008

Bruce, you’ve got it all wrong. I’m sure a lot of these people have jobs, and use stltoday.com to get their news. I think many of us have legitimate complaints. I understand the use of white space, particularly in print, but on a website, come on! Not everyone has an abundance of monitor space to have this new layout overwhelm it. If this is a matter of style over substance, I’d rather have my news easy to find and digest. The teal is totally off track with the feel of St. Louis, the font and size are too much to bear. I\’m open to change, I just think they’ve gone about this redesign all wrong. But I’ll wait for Kurt to ingratiate this debacle with happy comments from others like yourself while truly ignoring the legitimate complaints at what, I see, are the majority of the posters.

— Bill Beard
11:45 am May 7th, 2008

Hate the new design! Who in came up with this bad idea?

— joe
11:49 am May 7th, 2008

I get a pop-under ad every time I click on content, and now have 8 ads on my desktop…all for the same advertiser. If you do not address this problem quickly, those ads will disappear when readers like me do.

— Steve
11:54 am May 7th, 2008

I have to say that the new look for the web site is horrible on the eyes. It does not have any real flow or division of the subjects and articals. At first I thought my computer had miss loaded the page and tried to refresh it twice. The only good thing I have seen so far is that the pictures are very clear. Please get something more asthetically pleasing to the viewer and a little more used friendly.

— Mark
11:55 am May 7th, 2008

I have to say that I hate this new website. It’s too bland, hard to follow and very unorganized. Who designed this because they need to go back to the drawing board. There needs to be better sections, different fonts, more color and overall better organization. I will go to ksdk.com or another sight from now on to get my St. Louis news.

— Mindy
12:13 pm May 7th, 2008

Kurt–
Hang in there. To be honest, I don’t love the new site either, but I’ll adjust. I wouldn’t want your job today though. It blows my mind how rude that people are! Good luck working out all of the kinks.

— Mallory
12:17 pm May 7th, 2008

You have to be kidding, right? This is an abomination.

— Mike
12:19 pm May 7th, 2008

Overall I’m ok with the website changes. Its takes a little to get used to now that the page is so much bigger. I think you need to be a little more consistant in some of the formatting though. I don’t think using a Sans Sarif font for your normal article text is a good thing. Seems to take a lot of effort to read when its this big. Its fine for headlines and such, but not long text.
Your home page is good except you need to address some inconsistant whitespaces between sections. There’s big blocks of space that could have been used for something else.
I don’t mind the big quotes for the comments, but I think they are a little too big for the size of the text. Your FAQ above could use some reformatting.. you seem to have lost any indenting or paragraph spacing you might have had before.
And change the background color.. not so much that gradient green is a problem, but that its too light a color to use when the rest of your page is white. Maybe get rid of the gradiant or less of a teal at the light end of it. Hope this is helpful.

— Bradley
12:22 pm May 7th, 2008

The old site had a gadget in it to detect and adjust the page to one’s screen size. I haven’t really “seen” the new site yet, as, on an 800×600 15″ diag monitor, 1/4 of the page is never visible. Kurt, I hope you persuade the web code guru to install one of those gadgets. It does seem to function under Win98SE and FF2 — still in “save” mode for a new computer, and for the first time, I can click on Suburban Journal articles and actually get there.

My preference is for more text with more story background, less video and small pictures. If I wanted talking heads video, I would go to a TV site. If people want big pictures, make them clickable. This is a newspaper, even if it is on the web. What annoys me no end about Web news outlets is when they have only video, and no accompanying text, as my pokey Net connection of 384-600kbps makes all video jerky and disjointed. (It’s the best I can do without moving somewhere — they call this DSL in my neighborhood.) I have to go look for info elsewhere.

I’m not a big fan of mouseover flashing access, either. Mouseover menus are ok. Maybe I’m just trying to get from one story to another. I’ve been misdirected twice this morning, and I hadn’t clicked anything.

“Sound bites” are not news. An example is the current AP story on meth. X and Y are in St. Louis to sign some federal agreement. No details. Or police blotter stories which say “A young man was killed in the 800 block of Lindbergh. No details are available.” Well, then don’t post it until details are available.

The front page of a newspaper should be news, and teasers to peruse further. Links are teasers. But I really don’t like the P-D becoming a really big Suburban Journal. Life exists beyond the city and county, and why St. Charles has its own section, and not Franklin/Jefferson or at least a Southwest News section is beyond me. I don’t give a rip what happens in St. Chuck, and hardly think it equates to Metro East in coverage.

Also, I realize anything Cardinals will always lead, but I do not care one whit about ‘hollywood’ or TV celebrities, or people who are famous for being famous. Carry such drivel if you must, but don’t put “Who’s off American Idol” on equal billing with the Presidential race, or local disaster coverage. Put them in their own corner (preferably the lower left.) I wish the news dept would carry more Missouri and Illinois outstate news, (Springfield, KC, Columbia, outstate) and downstate for Illinois. Also, St. Louis hasn’t had a decent Outdoors editor since Bill Seibel on the Globe-Democrat. Other than Tom Ulhenbrock’s travel features, the P-D has no regular outdoor recreational sports (hunting, fishing, hiking, places to go, tips) unless it’s some environmental cause. It’s a big industry and you all are missing the boat. Literally. More natural resources stories, please.

I know, we’re in beta test here. Well, a beta has spoken.

— Teresa
12:26 pm May 7th, 2008

The ‘cycling headline’ is just obnoxious. I used to really like this site. I understand change is inevitable and you guys want to keep things ‘fresh’, but I think I’ll just get my news elsewhere.

Good luck. (You’ll really need it).

— Greg
12:29 pm May 7th, 2008

All I can say is, “wow.” I guess the only place online I’ll be getting my news now is CNN.com. STLToday.com was great for quickly getting news for St. Louis, but if this design is permanent, I’m going elsewhere.

One good thing about this new site, at least when I click on a link, it does not take 30 seconds for the page to appear (not load). I think all the advertisements were clogging up the server and response time was painfully slow.

— Rhyno
12:30 pm May 7th, 2008

This re-structure is a nightmare! You’ve taken what was a very easy to use, logical, professional looking, and locally driven portal and made it into a generic, hard to navigate, over glossed, over advertised mess. …and I’m being kind.

Please change it back.

— gleespan
12:32 pm May 7th, 2008

Bradley: Thank you for your thoughtful comments. The story page, candidly, isn’t where we want it to be yet, so you raise a number of good points that are going to be addressing.

And, indeed, there’s still a few tweaks that need to be made on in our blog theme that should address some of the points you raised there, too (i.e. bold type, paragraph spacing, bullets, etc.)

Mallory, thank you, too, for your kind remarks.

Rhyno, thanks for the comment about load time. It is something we’ll watch closely. The first visit to the site may take longer than subsequent visits because, indeed, there’s some javascript stuff that needs to download once.

— Kurt Greenbaum
12:38 pm May 7th, 2008

PS I like the teal. I get a blank teal flash when I go to the home page, and again when I start to scroll, and sometimes all the text (most of front page) shows up in teal for about 20 seconds and then it blinks off. The page just isn’t that stable with all the mouseovers.

The maroon is better than all that red. What makes the text hard to read are the square serifs. What font is that?

— Teresa
12:44 pm May 7th, 2008

these comments are very funny. This is the best stuff I have read all day. I have spent more time reading the comments than the paper!!

— DT
12:56 pm May 7th, 2008

No substantive comments about the re-design per se - I agree with others that the overall layout will take time to adjust to. I do however take issue with the pop-under ads which appear when clicking on nearly every story link. This was also a problem with the previous layout. In order to comment here, we are required to type in an “anti-spam” code to verify we aren’t spammers - why then does the P-D bombard its web viewers with these spam-like pop-under ads? FOR SHAME.

— Brian
1:06 pm May 7th, 2008

I haven’t been through the entire website yet, but one thing I really do not like are the HUGE quotation marks around the comments people post. I really like the numbered comments. Easier to direct people to. While I don’t really like the website yet, I’m not going to say I won’t be back. I’ll be back, but it is a little harder to find things. I did like the overview on the homepage on the previous design. Keep working on it and I’m sure it’ll get better. Some of the other constructive comments made some excellent points on what needs to change.

— Tiffany
1:12 pm May 7th, 2008

Teresa: Thank you again for your comments. You’re the first person to explicitly say she liked the teal! As for the body type, you’re right, it’s an issue we just haven’t addressed completely yet and we will be working on improving the readability.

Regarding the secure code to post blog comments: I take your point about the pop-up ads. I am trying to get to the bottom of why some people are having such problems with it, but I haven’t had any luck on that yet. We are taking these concerns seriously, however. As for the secure code, you can avoid it forevermore by registering in the Member Center at http://stltoday.com/membercenter.

— Kurt Greenbaum
1:16 pm May 7th, 2008

For starters on this FAQ page it is very hard to read because every thing runs together. There are no indents at the start of a paragraph or alternately a half line space. The questions or section headers should proably be bolded to stand out. The hyper links are barely discernable because they are practically the same color as the muddy colored text.

A pet peeve is ANY thing that moves just by “mousing” over it. That is VERY annoying. If I want an action to happen, I like to click, not just roll over it( especially advertising ).

Did you guys get any feed back from real users, not just people in the Web Design department, before you launched this new design???

— B C
1:20 pm May 7th, 2008

Wow, I used to think stltoday.com was one of the better newspaper websites in the country. Not now! It’s unbelievable that they would go from one of the best to the absolute worst. Also, the positive comments here keep saying that people will just have to get used to it. WHAT??? Why would you design a website “people will just have to get used to”? Wouldn’t you design a website that people would embrace immediately and not have to get used to?

— Mick
1:24 pm May 7th, 2008

Hate it! Hate it! Hate it! I read this site everday, but I’m going to have trouble with this new version. It’s making my eyes bleed… Despite your apparent best efforts (which fell woefully short) it is not more easily navigable. Why did you have to screw up what was a perfectly good site. I suppose you have to justify paying someone a salary, but c’mon. This is ridiculous!

— Brian
1:27 pm May 7th, 2008

Well the web design department obviously doesn’t have any experience with basic UCD principles. C’mon guys you’ve got to expect more for the site that bills itself as the “#1 St.Louis Website”. This is the face of St. Louis.

A website should make it easier for a user to accomplish his goals not more difficult. Read:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User-centered_design

— Nick
1:32 pm May 7th, 2008

Ok, so apparently if you have a legitimate criticism it’s called being a “crybaby” or “giving the riot act.” Yeah, I suppose someone in the web design industry can only be taken seriously if they post their credentials and portfolio with every post, huh? Oh yeah, and teal is a horrible background color… even worse, a teal gradient. Jump on the Web 2.0 bandwagon much?

— Jookie
1:41 pm May 7th, 2008

@Bruce There is a science behind User-Centered Design of websites and this site violates most, if not all, of those principles. Some people have degrees in this line of work, thanks.

— Chris
1:50 pm May 7th, 2008

Nick and Jookie: I’m grateful for your participation here. Thank you. Clearly, you have some expertise in this area. I’d welcome an e-mail with very specific feedback on particular items that you think need to be addressed and how they might best be addressed. I cannot guarantee that we’ll agree with every suggestion, but I can guarantee that they will get a hearing.

My e-mail address is kgreenbaum@post-dispatch.com. Please feel free. The more specific, the better.

— Kurt Greenbaum
1:51 pm May 7th, 2008

Chris - What I should say is that constructive criticism is better than some of the all out “I hate it, hate it, hate it” comments that some of the posters wrote. How is that helpful to anyone? Be explicit BEYOND “back to what it was” and be more detailed. If you want to cry about it,and a lot of people are completely belly-aching, call your Mother. And hey man, if you’re in the business, shouldn’t you be telling these people this instead of me?

— Bruce
2:03 pm May 7th, 2008

When I go to a newspaper website I want news. When I log on to your new site almost the whole first page is blogs. I have no interest in the rants of people with so little to do in life that they spend all day on the internet sprouting uninformed and unsolicited opinions.

— J DAUWALTER
2:13 pm May 7th, 2008

I really like it. Great design. Easy to read, interesting. Congrats.

— Louise
2:15 pm May 7th, 2008

I DO like the drop-down menu on each page that is just below the HUGE StLToday.com logo and the HUGE whitespace around it and below the HUGE ad at the top. Make the HUGE logo smaller and the HUGE whitespace smaller and the HUGE ad smaller….Thanks! ~Lori

— Lori B
2:19 pm May 7th, 2008

Well. Didn’t expect to see this today.

As someone who has bemoaned the cramped and cluttered older design here, I think the new layout is several steps in a better direction. I’m reminded of the front page of the Saturday tabloid edition of the P-D, which has been praised by newspaper design experts. Indeed, STLtoday.com is now much more reminiscent of a…newspaper. Which is a good thing, I think. There are some issues, of course, but I consider the new look an overall improvement.

A few quick notes:

Ah, blessed whitespace. I feel as though I can breathe again. Much cleaner.

People who dislike the scrolling pictorial on the front page can stop it by clicking the pause button.

I’ll agree with those who think the main body type is too large. Readers can adjust that using their browser menu, or by clicking Control-Minus or -Plus on their PC keyboards (Command key instead of Control for Mac users?). Reduced just a step, the type looks fine. You could change the type size, or provide a way for the reader to do it.

More on the type: It renders differently - and more attractively - in IE than in Firefox.

Fat footers! All the kids are using them these days. Actually, it looks good. I have to say this, though, as others have: That is one big, honkin’ RSS icon.

The “Email this - Share this - Print this” logos and links: Much more modern and improved over the old arrangement that served the same purpose. Those old, clunkier links are still visible at the bottom of any given story, but I’m guessing that will change…?

I need to think about the Belt and the central tabbed modules. They feel like a substantial divide in the middle of the front page, and they have the effect of pushing news/entertainment/business/sports well below the fold. Perhaps splitting the difference here would help: keeping the Belt where it is while moving the tabbed sections to the right column. Maybe?

Time to stop hogging the comments section. Changes of this scope deserve more time and thought, but for now I’ll just commend you for making the kind of substantial change that the site really needed.

— Phil Barron
2:23 pm May 7th, 2008

look at ksdk website and see where the story about mulder jumps out at you then go to stltoday and see where you have to read through other headline to finally find it. When looking on the web quickness is what matters. Can we bring back the old website or better yet the GLOBE.

— al
2:28 pm May 7th, 2008

still like the overall look of the new website, but here’s my two bits of constructive criticism (without screaming I HATE I HATE IT I QUIT!). Many of the articles I’ve read, all the “i”s and “l”s in every word are blue whereas the rest of the text is black. That’s annoying, at best. Also, the adds on the left hand side, they’re only there for a bit of the page. When the length of the page (like this one) forces you to scroll down so far that there is nothing but white space to the left, is an eyesore. The soft tone of the text along with the brightness of the white on the entire rest of the page are literally making my eyeballs hurt, and I have excellent vision. I also miss the numbered comment posts. Those numbers were often used by others to reference previous posts.

— b
2:46 pm May 7th, 2008

“B”: Thanks for your feedback. As I mentioned (and I’m happy to mention it again), body type is clearly something we need to do some tweaking on. So this feedback is valuable.

As for numbering comments on posts, I would love more feedback on that. Candidly, I’m not really missing them — and, while I understand that readers would refer to other comments by number, the order would often get caddywhompus when comments were deleted. This was not an infrequent problem.

— Kurt Greenbaum
2:53 pm May 7th, 2008

I like the look that the new design is out to achieve, and I absolutely love the header of the pages. It is nice to see the site mimic the mother-ship (I can’t believe that wasn’t incorporated in the past in lieu of the ugly maroon/yellow color scheme).

Regardless, there are still kinks in the new design. People are correct, on individual pages the spacing and font work needs adjustment. This is highlighted on the Cardinal team page which has wide-open space, yet next to the main story all we see is a jumbled paragraph to the right of a picture (like the large pics though).

Another issue I see is that using IE the tabs at the top don’t work properly when I click on some column pages. Also, where is the weather-bird? On the team pages can we get a visual week schedule and/or standings? Why not use some of that white-space? It wouldn’t look anymore cluttered than a newspaper page?

Love the idea, and hope that you guys continue to put work into it. Obviously no reason to get discouraged given the previous outrage to the 2002 redesign, but don’t stop tweaking it yet! Regards.

— jonatmu
2:58 pm May 7th, 2008

I would be happy to discuss the new site design with Kurt. Add me to the Jookie and Nick list.

— Chris
3:03 pm May 7th, 2008

The layout and font seem worse than your previous design. I spend my entire day on the computer. This site has already given me more eye strain than any other application or web site that I use. Did you do any real readability studies on the new site? Or did an “expert” just tell you that it’s more readable? I can deal with change and updates, but not at the expense of usability.

I’m using IE7 on a 20″ monitor running 1400×1050 resolution. The actual content of your site already occupied less than 50% of my usable screen area. Now you’ve made it worse by adding even more white space and larger fonts. Blech.

— Eye Strain
3:17 pm May 7th, 2008

To the STLtoday.com team: Congratulations on a job well done. As the print edition pounted out today, this is a “soft” launch, and things will get better as the kinks are worked out. But I, for one, am enjoying the new look and navigation that doesn’t give me a seizure. :)

— stlhartg
3:20 pm May 7th, 2008

Whatever happened to “if it isn’t broken, don’t fix it”? The new design is a mess. This site used to be one of the first that I would check out in the morning. The old design had a classic look and it worked well. It was very easy to navigate. The new design is to much fluff and eye candy.

Every section appears to be worse than the one before it. Please, I beg of you to go back to the old design.

— Donald
3:27 pm May 7th, 2008

Ok, change is happening, I get it. But, does your banner across the top of page have to be so HUGE? Between the banner with the temp & the banner with the STL TODAY header, it takes up half the screen.
I am not crazy about this new look. Perhaps it will grow on people, but I doubt it.
I didn’t have any problems reading the previous rendition, it was not difficult “on the eyes”. But now, please, get real, this is a mess.
I don’t find tons of whitespace between links to be “easy” to read or “easy” on the eyes.
Please - go back to the previous look.

— A.M.
3:37 pm May 7th, 2008

I agree that this site is under construction so I will give it a week or so to determine my true thought about it. I do like the Drop down bar, but don’t like that everything is in huge typing and you can’t see everything that you are wanting to see. I am for change and I hope this paper makes the necessary changes by the end of this week, otherwise they will for sure lose visitors.

— Corby0712
3:49 pm May 7th, 2008

The new design is very clean. I think you need to move the main sections, news, business, sports, etc. much higher up on the page rather than ‘below the belt’. The community voices should be much lower.

— lm
3:57 pm May 7th, 2008

Here are some visual issues:

http://tinyurl.com/5jajk7

— James Brickman
3:59 pm May 7th, 2008

its UGLY. and fonts with serifs are harder to read onscreen, so if you were trying to help your aging babyboomer readers, that’s a fail.

it looks like you guys got a “my first webpage” kit and puked something out for all to see

did you even ask readers what they like/didnt like about the old site?

— Fran
4:03 pm May 7th, 2008

Also, please return to a sans serif font for on-screen reading.

— Eye Strain
4:06 pm May 7th, 2008

I think some of the griping is because its no longer obvious how to find things that are important to people. Why isn’t there a direct link to the Cardinal’s page from the main page sports section?

And on my laptop, half the screen are the banners when I first come to the site. Which means I have to scroll A LOT just to get to news.

— Fran
4:34 pm May 7th, 2008

A couple of style issues so far:

1) The Most Popular, Entertainment, and Classified sections should be on the same row. Currently the Classifieds section is below the first two.
2) The AP Content which should be to the right of the News sections currently appears below those sections.

I am using IE 6.0 and my screen is 14.1 inch widescreen.

— Chris
4:46 pm May 7th, 2008

Thanks for your comments, Fran. Regarding your point about the Cardinals page: That is what we hoped would be the beauty of the dropdown navigation. No matter WHERE you are on the site, you can get directly to the Cardinals page, because it’s always going to be in there, under sports.

— Kurt Greenbaum
4:47 pm May 7th, 2008

The new design is, well…TERRIBLE. It looks like crap, go back to the previous version. Even better, go back to the version you were using in 2000, it was better than this GARBAGE!!!!!

— George
5:02 pm May 7th, 2008

The new website is very messy and hard to read. There is not enough spacing between the text and the larger font seems more difficult to read (not easier). The slide show new stories scroll too fast. There is not enough time to read and click on the story before it changes. The same with the scrolling traffic log. It, too, scrolls too fast. I think it is very poor form to go “live” with a new website before working out the obvious bugs. I liked the old format, and I don’t have anything good to say about this one. I guess I’ll go back to reading the paper.

— John Doe
5:40 pm May 7th, 2008

I have to say that I do not like the new website at all. It’s difficult to navigate through. The whole look is very ameteurish. It does not represent a major news publication very well. Several people blamed the webmaster for this disaster, but we have to keep in mind that the webmaster designed it, but the powers that be at the top had to approve it. Very poor decision. I’ll be getting my news elsewhere online.

— Lara
6:24 pm May 7th, 2008

I didn’t like the old design. This is worse. There are many reason I say that, I’ll focus on the one that makes the sight a pain to actually use.

The auto-popdown menu. I load the page from a bookmark (at the top of the screen). I see a story about the Cards, I move down to click on it and POOF I am in the business auto pop-down menu. It blocks the link I want, and half the page. I move up above the menu and it goes away. So I move back to click on the Cards story and POOF, there is the stupid menu. So I move down the screen, wait a second for the menu that I will likely never use to goes away, then I click on the story about the cards– wait, it is now a story about a sneak peak at the new design. Crap.

I mean, cangrats for trying, we need a new design, but man this is bad. Just bad. I am not saying that because I haven’t used it long enough, it really is bad.

And please stop flashing those stories over and over (ala ABC news). Or, at least make them stay up long enough to read what is there. I can’t even read the headlines in the time you leave it up there.

“Nellie Bradley walked away from a murder — Cards vs rockies.” Wait, I was reading that!

— richard
6:58 pm May 7th, 2008

This is ridiculous. It’s too hard to read. All the words just seem to blend together, I can’t find anything.

Many many places offer different styles of pages for people who want the “classic” versions..

The links are pretty much the same color as the type, I can barely see them. I think I’ll be with everyone else and find some other website for St. Louis news.

— Lance P
7:25 pm May 7th, 2008

Just saw the new design for the first time. Although it won’t matter, please put my vote in for going back to the drawing board if you have to have something new. Don’t see any improvement on this end, I like the previous design much better. Hope you didn’t spend too much on this.

— Rick Fortney
7:51 pm May 7th, 2008

It’s less organized, harder to navigate and has less information available at a glance. I’m betting the designer knows about as much about web design as the PD knows about politics.

— Realist
8:06 pm May 7th, 2008

This new site is CRAP!! When you need an extensive page devoted on how to read a newspaper web site…..that should tell you the design is very, very,poor.

I use to read every day…couple times during the day. Forget it…..I’ll read the St. Louis Business Journal.

— joe
8:14 pm May 7th, 2008

Not to reiterate too much, but I really don’t like it. I agree with several posters who said it was a step backward (10 years maybe?). Can’t stand the serif fonts. I didn’t like your last website either - didn’t like that wierd gray grid, HATED all the popups - it took forever to load the home page while it hooked up to adcrap.net or whatever. I was ready to move on because of that, now you’ve given me a shove. I don’t want to hear any whining when people stop showing up, you guys did this to yourselves.

And is that turquoise or aquamarine? Either way, this is a red town guys, come on!

— Mark T.
10:03 pm May 7th, 2008

What possibly possessed you to choose some aquamarine/teal shade to use as your primary brand color? Same monster that ordered the rusty stripe on the paper version?

Can you please make the rotation of the four stories on the front page either stop or slow down? If I want to see what is on one of them, next thing you know you are taking me to another. Too much action.

I have to ask it again …….. teal?????? Nothing says St. Louis like teal. Seriously, what is your answer there?

There is way, way, way too much white space. It actually hurts one’s eyes to have any one page up too long … it is like looking into headlights. My computer looks like a drive in movie screen

I know you are trying and redesigns are part of evolution, but did you test this on anyone? Focus groups?

The content is good. THAT is what makes a website. Don’t dumb down the content by decorating it, and that is what you have done here.

The sad thing is, we’re stuck with this. I know that. No matter how many complaints you get, it will be “give it a chance.” And I have done that with the newspaper redesigns, all of which say the same thing year after year —- easier to read, easier to navigate, on and on. Have you ever heard a reader say, “I cannot read or navigate your newspaper!”? Bet not.

Again, I do respect you are trying to do something good. Please take my comment as constructive, but you have done something bad. Your reply will be appreciated.

— louis18
10:16 pm May 7th, 2008

This is remarkably unfortunate. I suppose this might be a way to increase print subscription, but will ultimately result only in reduced online viewership. The site is terrible and must not have been subjected to a sufficient trial review by the customer. Your ignorance is as foolish as the ego that could only be responsible for such a dissapointment.

— Another former student
10:24 pm May 7th, 2008

Had to say something here…I appreciate everything stltoday has done to get this up and running. I actually love the design and layout. Understanding what kind of work goes into websites with this much content and interactivity is one thing. working to get it done is another.

I also appreciate, that while most of these comments are slightly negative and rude, it is nice to know that the stltoday viewers have at least some sense of humor. Rough day today…this made for some great laughs. my favorite? “i honestly think you’re trying to make the website unreadable in the hopes that people would rather buy the paper than visit the website.” thanks nick, great business plan. that was hilarious. I’ll be sure to use that in conversations :) jokingly of course. The kindergartner comment is funny too, along with the link to the site under construction link. whoops! LOL good one.

— StlAL
10:44 pm May 7th, 2008

For all the faults the old site had it was much, much better than this. Did it need a revamp? Absolutely. But this is just terrible.

As another poster said, if your aim was to increase print readership by driving people away from the website, you may be incredibly successful in your endeavor.

— Bryan N
11:03 pm May 7th, 2008

This took an hour to design:

http://www.walmedia.com/stltoday/

— Chris
11:10 pm May 7th, 2008

Chris, by took an hour to design do you mean it took an hour to copy and paste CNNs site?

You and the other four repeat whiners here should get a life. Youve made your point, now move on.

— Not Fooled
12:57 am May 8th, 2008

Wha, Wha, Wha…I wish people would whine as much about crime, violence, cialis commercials @ 5:30pm, and teens who have zero respect and whom are entitled to everything now. How petty.

FREE News, Sports, Entertainment, Lifestyles and Other information…

— Uncle Bob
12:30 pm May 8th, 2008

I can’t figure out how to find the various Suburban Journals on the new site. I also find it difficult to navigate.

— Karen
1:57 pm May 8th, 2008

There is too much wasted white space. Lots of “fluff” but the “hard” news of the day is difficult to locate. I read numerous newspaper’s web sites and this is not a winner. Very poorly done. I loved the old stltoday, probably won’t bother to read this one as much.

— Nancy Clough
3:48 pm May 8th, 2008

OMG…do you guys know the words information overload. Too many subsections, too many menus. too much that isn\’t even news. Why do you think people like RSS? thats right, its simple and gives you the news with out all the blatant ads. And Turquoise! Done…never coming back. 75% of your stories aren\’t even your stories anyway, so I\’ll just start going to one of the national sites.

People read STLToday for news coverage…not a demonstration of amazing flash animations. Comeon

— Jeff
7:24 pm May 8th, 2008

The “Most Popular/Entertainment/Classifieds” boxes above your “belt” are ENORMOUS. Put those at the bottom of the page! They are an odd mix of categories, considering you have to scroll down so far just to get to the News module, much less the Sports. I agree that you needed a redesign, but this was not it; this is much less readable than before, unfortunately. Please try again.

— Martin Berg
8:57 pm May 8th, 2008

In my previous comment I forgot one more thing which also puzzled me in the last version of the website, although in the new version it is entirely absent: the logo of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. At least in the previous version you had it in the left column (really small, but there) and on the flag you had it then, as now, as if it were of equal importance to…the Ladue News?? St. Louis’ Best Bridal??
I understand these are sister publications,and you may have internal corporate reasons for making sure they are noted but c’mon–we’re talking here about a publication founded by Joseph Pulitzer himself and you’d think you were ashamed of it. STLToday may be the website name, but I think I’m on safe ground saying that 90% of your visitors really are intending to read the fabled Post-Dispatch, whatever your internal corporate mandates may be. The P-D logo should be large, prominent and at the top…but most of all, it should BE there.

— Martin Berg
9:10 pm May 8th, 2008

I won’t likely visit the site as often. The news doesn’t appear as accessible as before. You now bring a lot of attention to features instead of listings of available articles. I don’t want you driving me to a specific article…I like reading obscure information that others may pass over.

Usually I prefer NEWSpapers of the TV station sites, but now I may have to find another source for my primary source for local news.

— Montague
8:05 am May 9th, 2008