I have been saying for years that eventually the print product will become like a TV Guide for the web site. In other words, the paper will provide summaries, lots of names and faces (can you say hyper-local?), and dailies anyway will be published less frequently. The paper will “tease” to the web, where the meat of the information can be found.

First, this will be cheaper. Imagine if your paper could cut its newsprint bill in half. That’s another one or two web workers right there. Second it plays into the younger cohorts’ preference for quick-n-dirty reads on the web or cell phone, and you better be pandering to their tastes and preferences if you hope to have a business in 10 years.

This will take a re-wiring of many “older” journalists’ brains, who will fight until they have to pry that pica pole from their cold, dead, ink-stained hand.

But it is really pretty much the same thing we newspaper folks have always done. Deliver what people want and need in a compelling presentation in words and visuals. Just do it in pixels instead of ink. Yes, you will need to learn some new skills, but what could be more exciting?

Enjoy becoming a pixel-stained wretch. (More to come next post.)

At the same time, we see that the Orlando Sentinel has gone through a major redesign. This is even after research has shown that redesigns don’t do much to stanch the losses in circulation.

Nonetheless, design remains an important, maybe even critical, component of a successful newspaper. This is not because it is important to “look good,” but because of what computer interface designers refer to as the “user experience.” I also like to toss in “branding” as well.

Several years back, Peter Morville listed seven aspects that comprise the user’s experience with your web site www.semanticstudios.com/publications/semantics/000029.php). You would be well served to pay attention to each as you create the design and content of your print product and your web site.

Valuable: This should be obvious, but often isn’t. Are you providing content that is valuable to your customers, or are you providing content YOU think they ought/need to know? Your customers will pay for value.

Useful: This is tied to value, which is more of an “idea” issue. Being useful means that you are providing content and design that your customers can actually use to improve their lives quickly and easily.

Usable: Do the navigation bars make sense and do the buttons on your web site appear in the proper order or do you make your web visitors think? (Don’t ever make your readers think about navigation!) This is where good, user-centered design comes in.

Desirable: This where the look and feel of your products elicit positive emotional reactions in your customers. Again, this involves creating good designs. Apple understands this very well.

Findable: Can your readers find their way easily through your content, whether in print or pixels? Do you anchor recurring features in the print product?

Accessible: Are your news products accessible to all?

Credible: Do your presentation of news and information inspire credibility? This can even be affected by design, which is not just a cosmetic add-on. The design and organization of your news products can say a lot about your “brand” of credibility, if done professionally and thoughtfully. This is why I think redesigns done largely with cosmetic goals in mind are the ones most likely not to succeed.

If you are paying attention to these components of how your readers experience your news products, then you are probably doing well.

All this ties into the “branding” and marketing of your paper and its web site. Wouldn’t it be nice if, when people in your area are asked to think of words that describe your paper, their list reads like Morville’s?