Thursday, February 2, 2012

New, and improved, MLive.com

Here's a link to the new MLive.com.  Also here is a link to the Flint page. I'm going to reserve comment until I negotiate it a little and see how easy it is to use and what the quality of news is. One thing should be for sure, it can't be any worse than the old site.
Posted by at

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

My initial comments are... Is this it? This is the new MLive? Really? I'm not crazy about the banana peel theme, though no one color will please everyone. I'm not sure it's much easier to navigate. Blogger entries seem thrown in with news stories and it's a little hard to distinguish, at a glance, the big news stories from the observations of a mall walker. Somewhere, I found a list of FJ reporters. Interestingly, they list Flint-famous columnist Andy Heller. So does he have a new job as of Feb. 2 or do they list all general content producers (who, say, aren't in Sports) as "reporters"? Doing so would inflate the paper's staff size, but I'm being cynical. All and all, trying to be objective, I don't see the new look as a home run. Considering the hype and the stakes, it might be considered a strikeout, but it certainly is no grand slam. The MLive leadership will argue the site is a work in progress, a living document if you will, but the document won't be living very long under these conditions. Sorry, I wish I could be more upbeat.

02 February, 2012 15:26
Anonymous said...

The columnist hasn't worked at The FJ for a couple of years. He has a regular day job but freelances his column to The FJ and other papers. His stuff has paled in these last couple years, but probably because he has to do "other" work to pay the bills.
This new and improved site has lots of feedback from writers, which is apparently being encouraged. So much for the days when reporters told a story and opinion was kept separate. The new news is opinion. I've gotten used to it enough to stop reading.The constant drum beating of how much better it is to have fewer writers hurts my ears anymore. Sadly makes me wish for the days when tough talking reporters didn't have to be smiley, happy followers to an editors stagnant chipper "we're getting better" beat.

02 February, 2012 20:38
Anonymous said...

Hi Anonymous 20:38. Yes, I'm aware of the columnist's status as an FJ freelancer working from Lansing. I was speculating that, because he is listed as a reporter, which I believe is something new, perhaps he got one of those new content producer (reporter) gigs and, in so doing, returns triumphant and fulltime to the FJ. Or maybe his status changed in some other way coinciding with the Feb. 2 deadline for MLive changes and/or layoffs. If you work at the FJ or otherwise know the columnist is still just phoning in columns from Lansing, then fine. Another thing I noticed on the FJ online today is WKAR's own Tim Skubick listed on a story or two with an MLive byline. Huh? Many of us know ol' Tim as host of the show, Off the Record. So MLive apparently has added Tim to its payroll. I'm guessing the MLive leadership saw this as some big addition to the new adventure. Wooooooooooo! I wonder how long it will take for folks to associate Skubick with MLive. I hope that if he is being paid to report for MLive, the already employed Skubick didn't take a job from some poor laid-off smuck. Reporting for WKAR, Detroit radio and Off the Record ain't enough for you, Tim? Ironically, Skubick shuns Flint reporters on his show, though he does have Booth guests occasionally. Wonder if that will change now?

02 February, 2012 23:33
Bob Allen said...

The one question I have, crass as it may be: How does this bring in more revenue to do more journalism?

03 February, 2012 12:03
Anonymous said...

Following up to my 15:26 comments, I must say I liked the new design in Thursday's paper. I wasn't blown away but I liked the look overall, and see it as an improvement. It may be that the old look lingered so long that any change would look good. But in case I'm being overly critical of MLive, I thought it fair to give 'em credit for the printed product's overhaul. Now, the quality of the MLive-powering content in those redesigned pages remains to be seen.

03 February, 2012 12:45
Anonymous said...

One word sums up the new MLive website:

AWFUL

-Terrible color scheme. That mustard color and their main font just makes me want to throw up.

-The river of news format just sucks. There's no priority to the stories. A lost cat is just as important as a serious news story. And it's painfully obvious they have no staff. Stories with little news value remain high up on the river of news for 20 hours because they have no fresh content coming in.

-The site architecture is still confusing and a mishmash.

-And I don't buy the MLive moniker as a good brand. Does anybody ever use MLive to refer to where they saw the news? Or do they say, "Did you see that on the Citpat, GR Press, Gazette, etc." There's simply no way to anchor yourself in the MLive site. I still feel like I'm in some bizarro world using their site.

All in all, this is a company that deserves to feel the wrath of "creative destruction."

Just turn out the lights already!

04 February, 2012 14:13
Anonymous said...

Hey Bob Allen! Here's a crass question back at you from your former Booth mates. What's the bottom line look like at your current employer, Crain's Detroit Business? Did you wind up in the black last year? How's readership? Rumor is your numbers were declining. Has Crain's figured out how to monetize its Web and print products "to do more journalism?"

04 February, 2012 16:37
Jim of L-Town said...

Bob at least signed his name to his post anonymous 16:37. From now on, if you are going to address a commenter by name, you will need to include yours. Only fair. Jim

04 February, 2012 17:50
Bob Allen said...

It is a fair question, Jim. The short answer is that, yes, we were in the black last year. "Monetize" is kind of vague. But if you mean is revenue growing from sources other than print, then I think the answer is yes. Not enough, of course. Certainly not enough to give advice, which is not what I did in that comment. I make a much better CDB critic than I do a spokesman. My question, "How does this bring in revenue?" is, in fact, a question, not a veiled criticism. I don't veil my criticism any more than I veil my comments.

07 February, 2012 10:08
Jim of L-Town said...

You are a gentleman Bob. Thanks for the comments, and our information.

07 February, 2012 11:31
Anonymous said...

And this is what passes for the new and improved journalism at The Flint Journal.

http://www.mlive.com/sports/flint/index.ssf/2012/02/correction_an_error_made_in_re.html

07 February, 2012 21:36
Anonymous said...

Don't know why my link didn't come through, but here is the article that I meant to send:

In a story that was posted this morning, "Tuesday's Flint-area prep basketball forecast," I mentioned that there was "speculation" that the Flint Metro League was "disbanding." Although it was stated as speculation and not fact, it was completely off base and should not have been included.

The information that it came from was confused with changes that already took place with the Big 9 conference and Saginaw Valley along with potential changes with a different league not associated with the Flint area or the Flint Metro League.

As a new reporter to the Flint area, I confused the leagues and information into a small snippet of a larger post. The story has been edited with a correction and retraction embedded in it. My apologies for giving the appearance of credibility to misguided and confused speculation regarding the Flint Metro League.

07 February, 2012 21:41
Jim of L-Town said...

Wondered what happened, the link only took me to the sports section, but I see the correction now.

Jim

07 February, 2012 21:42
Anonymous said...

So the story is that a story in USA Today is based on a story that was in The Flint Journal weeks ago? That's a story?
http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2012/02/churches.html

That's why I don't work there anymore, because to me, there are better stories to take up space. I don't get why they report on places reporting on stuff they already did? Or linking to other sites stories and using it as fill. Actually I do get it, I just wish they'd write stories, run them and then nod and smile knowingly when other mediums found their pieces worth using. I think I would prefer to write the stuff others want to use, not use the stuff others write.

09 February, 2012 08:50
Anonymous said...

Another example:
http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2012/02/flints_homicide_spree_featured.html

So there's a one graph story in The Journal linking to a story about Flint in the Wall Street Journal.

09 February, 2012 08:52
Anonymous said...

Funniest thing I ever heard came recently when a friend said she wondered if the people who designed the MLive site (and picked that god-awful yellow color) ever heard of the term yellow journalism?

16 February, 2012 09:12

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)