5 comments

[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 26.6 ms ] thread
Having worked with an online newspaper before I'm missing an important component: ads. The design looks beautiful, it's best for users, but the business deciders really care about space for banner ads, promotions, sponsor links and cross links to other products. Worse if you have less ads than before because that means less revenue short term.

Google might think differently. They might run the product at loss. I just want to point out the realities when dealing with redesigns sometimes.

That's a very good point. I know most of us will block ads in one way or another, but it would have really behooved this designer to also put a lot of cycles into rethinking how ads are integrated and displayed. I'm not even really talking about ways and methods for preventing blocking of them, or designing the site so it looks horrible with blocked ads; but rather how to integrate revenue generation, i.e., ads, in a way that is pleasing or even maybe enhancing and value adding.

I personally find that there is no middle ground at all when it comes to ads. It's either you are deluged with irrelevant ads that are just jammed onto pages and make them ugly as shit, or the content is written with an obvious intent to sell something or even to augment the ads for products and services.

All I see anymore is the [X] to close an ad if it's a popup. I don't even see the advertiser or product and if I do, it's an automatic mark against them.

Otherwise, I've learned to read around ads without really seeing them.

While it does say "Redesign Concept" at the top, isn't it a bit disingenuous to have the large main title read "Introducing the new UX and UI for Google News platform"? It is at best a "potential new UX and UI".
Even to claim it could potentially ever be used by Google is a lie.