There’s always a workaround.

Perhaps TV broadcaster sites may just be new to the game. Most news sites that were active in 2000 learned something from 9/11. You need to be able to execute a takeover.

In the future it will be interesting to see if news sites trigger breaking news takeovers region by region. For example, the fires were a much bigger deal for San Diego before they would have justified a nationwide takeover of the CNN web site.

Finally, I would suggest that Cory represent his screens more accurately when scaling them down and adding them to his entry’s inline. I thought MSNBC had done something groundbreaking with the massive image for the lead until I realized that they are still utilizing an 8×6 page design — while the other two are 10×7. Scaling them down to appear to be using the same page resolution is actually a bit misleading.

Go Sox!

Try working for a Tribune TV station and you will.

I think the best we can do as journalists is to learn from this situation and think about how we can build on in the future. If the CMS interface doesn’t allow manipulating the layout, take matters further than a Band-Aid. I would think that if one took the initiative to code a mock-up the page by combining boxes for a breaking news situation and went to corporate with his/her suggestions, it would be in corporate’s best interest to listen. You have a stronger argument if websites owned by the same company are using the same design, because then you have solved their “what if” situation also. If corporate shuns the idea and doesn’t have a good reason, doesn’t have anything in the works and doesn’t plan on taking any action,… why would you want to work for such a company that would make you want to pull out your hair day after day?
……

Berman wrote - “Story angles get lost in the rotating tabs. Then look at LATimes.com.”

LATimes.com is based off of the same design as Chicagotribune.com & Sun-Sentinel.com (optional rotating boxes), Newsday.com (automatic rotating boxes)…. the list goes on. These are just different examples of how the same design was reused.
……

Bergman wrote - “Everything feels like it’s jammed into small, inflexible boxes. Then look at LATimes.com. Clean, straighforward with an expanded coverage area that pops.”

The problem with most news sites is that there is no central visual image. If there is a quasi-central visual image there is an ad that distracts from it that is 2x to 3x the size of it. What would happen if you put 10 small or medium sized images on the front page of a print newspaper? It would never make it to the printing press.

What if we took the same approach to layout as Google’s customizable homepage or facebook profiles but took it a step further. Just because the layout changes doesn’t mean the branding does. What if instead of placing content on the web we designed homepages with ease and flexibility for rearranging content. Each day or designated time or maybe when a big news event occurs, a designer would interact with a CMS that allows them to select a two column or three column layout, then allows them to break up those columns further.

they are “corporate” CMS’ and, yes, actually do this.

the results are astounding when people plan in advance.

actually, I’ve never encountered an “evil corporate CMS” that doesnt allow this…

Places like San Diego probably have staffs designed to meet minimal day to day coverage needs, much less the catastrophic story, and when a huge story kicks in, it’s hard to count on help from the news folks because they are slammed doing their jobs.

Besides, if you just get a ‘body’ it’s hard to train them instantaneously and often the ‘help’ costs you more time than no help.

Web sites need to be included in catastrophic planning, for Katrina, we were pushed to the head of our list, especially since the majority of our viewers were out of TV range and depended on our live streams to get their local coverage. The problem is, the web is designed for THIS type of story (provided the spigot is large enough and doesn’t crash), but TV resources are hard to translate to the web on a moment’s notice.

It’s a signal that web staffs and the web’s importance needs to be put more into catastrophic planning and that more of the TV staff needs basic web publishing skills so they can help in time of crisis.

WIth so many people out of their homes, I assume the web is IT again for this story.

The fact that the logo is green, even though it’s for Planet in Peril, also makes my brain think, something really different is going on, I must pay attention to what is on my screen.

Which brings up the question, how unlucky is CNN to have their giant, super-publicized ratings event take place at a time when their competitors will have live video of 500 miles of fires and half a million evacuees?