Opinion BY Sam Becker

Mergers & Executions

BusinessWeek, a weekly periodical catering to the business community (go figure), was recently acquired by Bloomberg Media from their previous owner, McGraw-Hill. Financial pundits saw this as a quick route for Bloomberg, the successful, finance-oriented media outlet started by the mayor of New York, to a strong presence in print. More to the point, it was viewed as an opportunity to make Bloomberg, the unseen hand behind so many news feeds and stock tickers, more of a household name. And so it came to be. Their name now graces the living rooms and reception areas of millions of homes and businesses across the world, announcing its debut by turning a new page in BusinessWeek’s 80-year history.

The new logo for Bloomberg BusinessWeek, featuring their custom drawing of Helvetica, represents a small piece of the overall redesign

According to Fortune:

The magazine’s 4.5 million readers were a big draw for Bloomberg. That’s 4.5 million more impressions of Bloomberg as a brand name provider of business content. Its own Bloomberg Markets print title is distributed to only its roughly 300,000 terminal users. And while 80 million people may read Bloomberg wire copy, most read it syndicated in newspapers worldwide.

BusinessWeek is one of the few magazines that I subscribe to at home. I am as guilty as the next person of lazily consuming most of my news online and I have always felt that BusinessWeek made for a nice exception to this routine. Their content fits snuggly within the cross-section of business and design, two topics indispensable to a branding employee. Unlike so many magazines these days, BusinessWeek still seemed worth the time to read and the money to subscribe to (i.e., relevant).

Select spreads from the previous BusinessWeek magazine—simple typography, bold use of red and austere layouts helped create a strong voice and compelling hierarchy

This is the second major redesign for BusinessWeek in less than three years. It was last covered by Brand New in October of 2007 to generally positive reviews. My overall impression of the past design was that it was strong, streamlined and deliberate. It made unreserved use of the (brand) color red. The hierarchy was as flat as possible. The editors didn’t let the organization or sectioning of the publication interfere with their no-nonsense journalism.

The overview of the new magazine tells a very different story.

Select spreads from the redesigned Bloomberg BusinessWeek, which trades focus for flexibility, diversity and a general robustness of content

The new design makes room for more content, more sections and more advertising. The creators have introduced a new palette of typefaces (trading Akzidenz for Helvetica) along with rigorous — and sometimes obtrusive — color-coding. Red is hardly used at all and Bloomberg’s orange is curiously absent (except, of course, for color-coding). The new logo is beautifully set, but seems to miss some of the warmth and ownability of the last mark.

The redesigned cover does a better job of exposing the contents through a sneak peak section running along the top

It’s hard for me to be critical of the new design, very capably executed by Richard Turley of Guardian fame. As a designer I really appreciate a lot of the craft and nuance that went into this new design. I mean, who doesn’t appreciate a gorgeous, soup-to-nuts redrawing of Helvetica? The new type features better kerning, balance, capitals that line up with numerals and great character alternates like this capital ‘R.’

Haas Helvetica, drawn by Christian Schwarz (on top), compared to Helvetica Neue LT (on bottom)

But as a reader, I was a little disappointed. What I really liked about the previous design was its strong point of view in a sea of similar publications. It seemed like a magazine for the internet age: expedient and timely. Now, of course, the redesign has been hailed as a new magazine for a web-savvy, post-print world. Paradoxically, this design is supposed to be better because of the longer engagement it encourages (or requires, depending on how you look at it) by delving deeper. The previous design was a fast read and I appreciated it.

Bloomberg BusinessWeek detail spread of their technology section is crowded and hard to follow

The section openers provide some brief respites of calm

The final department at the end of each issue is called “Etc.” and it contains some odds and ends meant to add a little levity (and many levels of hierarchy)

Critiquing a magazine is tricky (especially over the lo-res web) because it’s difficult to separate the design decisions from the editorial ones. Given the amount of content and space on each page, the design team has done an admirable job organizing information and ensuring that it’s all scannable, legible and interesting. My issue, if I have one, is the jack-of-all-trades, overstuffed nature of this new incarnation. It might be that this is simply their maiden issue, which will be refined over time, but the whole thing reads a little too much like a catalogue right now. And the tone, brand, point of view, whatever you call it, seems to be a little watered down.

Defining the future of print is a fool’s errand and I’ll be curious to see how this particular vision pans out. The sad fact is that we will have fewer and fewer magazines. It’s a crowded space of shrinking relevance and there will really be only a handful of spots for singularly great publications. While Bloomberg BusinessWeek is well-designed and backed by the strength and prowess of Bloomberg Media, I wonder if it is unique enough in purpose and point of view to survive. Of course, the only way to appreciate the new design will be to go to an actual store and check it out.

D.tails_d.tails’s comment is:

My answers to the above questions were The Same/The Same/No.

Where the first two answers are concerned
*****************************************
Having a new logo these days doesn’t seem to be the ‘red-carpet’ event it used to be UNLESS it’s also instantly iconic.

For those that aren’t, which will include this too, it would seem that a relationship between the logo and the secondary object is absolutely necessary.

And from the above pix, while it does make an effort it’s still something well within my expectations of Bloomberg nothing too different from what BW was already doing, photography wise.

Nice work as long as they don’t mind having something that’s not absolutely mind blowingly amazing.

On Jun.10.2010 at 07:03 AM

Everett’s comment is:

Sadly, a conscious decision was made to move away from innovation to something more bland, despite its already broad acceptance. The redesign epitomizes contemporary American business: capable, but striving for mediocrity.

On Jun.10.2010 at 07:05 AM

Garrick Infanger’s comment is:

As a loyal BusinessWeek reader I was excited about the new owners and financial backing, but I was ticked when I realized they were upending the great minimalist design and logo. I’m still torn on the change. What has been lost in impact and look has more than been made up for in depth and breadth. There’s just a lot more information there than before and, surprisingly, it’s all really well done. One last note, no mention of the ‘W’ dropping to lowercase? Fair or foul?

On Jun.10.2010 at 08:00 AM

ScottyM’s comment is:

What’s with the shift to a serif type in various sections (Etc., and Singapore as examples) but not in others?

That’s weird … nay, BAD. What made BusinessWeek so terrific was just a few years back they did a redesign that turned out beautiful … where the type hierarchy greatly improved the reading experience.

This feels like 4-5 steps backward (based solely on what’s shown here).

On Jun.10.2010 at 08:01 AM

Garamond’s comment is:

It all looks very much like yet another Guardian rip-off.

On Jun.10.2010 at 08:19 AM

Shei Reyes’s comment is:

The new mark complements Scher’s design of the Bloomberg Headquarters, but I’d hold my take on the redesign of the mag until I experience it first-hand. I do like the simplicity/straightforwardedness of the previous layout though.

Hopefully the redesign would hold for more than 3 years this time!

On Jun.10.2010 at 08:43 AM

Aaron Martin’s comment is:

I find the new logo to be a bit plain, but I’m okay with that given the look of the magazine’s internal redesign. I find it clean, readable, and inviting.

The articles feel more contained and segmented. But, I do agree that it now comes across as a much slower read than the previous design.

On Jun.10.2010 at 08:49 AM

Terry Biddle’s comment is:

I was also a huge fan of the original design. I was a little disappointed that some of the typographic hierarchy had changed, but I think overall, the redesign is not that drastic.

I still think it is a very, very well designed magazine and the look and feel definitely stands out from the pack of other business related magazines.

The article preview at the top of the cover pages (previously mentioned) is a nice addition to the redesign.

This magazine looks very modern, and would easily translate to an iPad or tablet version in the future. Perhaps another reason for the redesign?

I’ll still be regularly picking this up at the newsstand.

On Jun.10.2010 at 09:07 AM

jonathan’s comment is:

The layouts look pretty pleasing, and I appreciate the subtle changes to Helvetica. I think Everett’s comment nailed it on the head though, “The redesign epitomizes contemporary American business: capable, but striving for mediocrity.” You really can’t put it any better than that!

On Jun.10.2010 at 09:17 AM

Scott Buchanan’s comment is:

Wow, the last two sets of pages look like they designed themselves straight back into the 80’s. What’s with all the fonts, too? The old design kept a nice, consistent feel all the way through. The new one looks like a melting pot of decades. Helvetica, the hairline geometric (“Innovation” section), and the heavy, bracketed serif make for a confusing mishmash.

I think these were their inspiration:
http://typophile.com/node/59994
http://www.flickr.com/photos/phirleh/sets/72157600176511300/detail/

On Jun.10.2010 at 09:18 AM

Daho’s comment is:

Looks like just another boring trade magazine. The former red branding at least gave it personality.

On Jun.10.2010 at 09:38 AM

Eric’s comment is:

Seems like the way all print news publications are trying to compete with the internet is to become more visual: bigger photos, pull-quotes, charts and info-graphics. Everything except more actual content. If you remove the big photos and spots of colors, there’s just a couple paragraphs of actual written copy. And if you want to read more, you’re encouraged to go to the website.

I can’t pass judgement on the layout of new BB mag until I read a copy, but if they are actually offering extended content, as indicated by the review, that would be welcome by me.

The Haas Helvetica looks great.

On Jun.10.2010 at 09:42 AM

C Jones’s comment is:

@ Scott,

Haven’t you heard? The eighties are making a come back, for better or worse.

I prefer to be optimistic about it.

On Jun.10.2010 at 10:17 AM

Devin Gonzales’s comment is:

I frequently visit the BusinessWeek website, and I immediately noticed the design change when it happened. A few people mentioned that the new design was trying to catch up to digital by adding more photos and features, but on the website they have done the opposite. Previously it was very easy to scan with a clear hierarchy, large photos, and a recognized brand identity. Now the site has been reduced to a list of links, small charts, and watered down, generic identity. Sad.

On Jun.10.2010 at 10:35 AM

Zanda’s comment is:

I am going back to sleep …

On Jun.10.2010 at 10:47 AM

Kim’s comment is:

I’ve got little interest in business, but I did flip through Business Week whenever I got the chance, because it always used some frankly awesome illustration. The merger seems to have severely cut down on the amount in use, and what’s still there isn’t nearly as nice as what was there before.

I know it’s a business magazine, not an illustration gallery, but that doesn’t stop me from feeling a little (irrationally) betrayed.

On Jun.10.2010 at 11:27 AM

Nick Campbell’s comment is:

The redesign reminds me of the Economist which does well financially along with the Financial Times and Wall Street Journal. I think the quality and focused content on finance and business will make this a much stronger player than you discount print for.

On Jun.10.2010 at 11:33 AM

Chip’s comment is:

Didn’t Modernista do the last redesign of BW? If I were them I’d be pissed, just a 3 year stint with that design. You’d hope for at least 5-10 years with such a large pub.

I bought last months edition after seeing it on a newsstand, and thinking WOW when I saw it. Not wow, because it looked so clean and swiss, but holy crap, they redesigned already?! Personally, I liked the bold, condensed Modernista version.

On Jun.10.2010 at 12:00 PM

Jay Sabicer’s comment is:

Another confirmation that the economy is in trouble - extremes form, either to the very bland and safe or a radical departure (as seen in the many new image redefinitions in academia). The people in charge, in fear of having their empires crumble, push their design teams towards a safer agenda. Academia, now more competitive than ever, will go in the other direction, figuring they have little to lose (can you remember any major educational institution going under? I can’t). Going back to last Monday’s redesign of Roosevelt University, the design still doesn’t tell me if the presidential Roosevelts had anything to do with its creation.
The sure sign of economic recovery is when major brands start fiddling with their look, to again start the cycle of being ‘sexier’ than their competition.

On Jun.10.2010 at 12:45 PM

amy’s comment is:

I loved the 2007 redesign and was annoyed at first when the magazine was changed yet again — especially with the clunky “Bloomberg Businessweek” monkier. But doggoneit! The magazine is much better now. Not only has the content improved, but the usability of the magazine is excellent. I begrudgingly give the new mag props.

On Jun.10.2010 at 12:48 PM

John Mindiola III’s comment is:

Is it wrong to want all your photos in boxes? How many clipping paths does one spread need?

On Jun.10.2010 at 01:16 PM

Shannon’s comment is:

While the logo is beautifully set and a step-up from the old, the design has taken a turn for the worse. My initial thought in viewing the image featuring multiple spreads was that Bloomberg Businessweek is the People magazine of the business world — overly busy & overly color-coded.

On Jun.10.2010 at 02:00 PM

qwertyale’s comment is:

the old was entire heavyweight

On Jun.10.2010 at 02:19 PM

Huntley Brinkley’s comment is:

It reminds me of the Business Week design from about 10 years ago, especially the cover layout and the logo. Boring with a capital B. The design and logo they’ve thrown out had a much stronger visual stance.

On Jun.10.2010 at 02:44 PM

grubedoo’s comment is:

Although I like the new design it feels more like a well designed DIY magazine—i.e. Blueprint—than a business journal.

The redrawing of Helvetica is very nice. The alternate capital R is a refreshing change of pace but is too heavy compared to the rest of the type.

The logo is well crafted but boring.

On Jun.10.2010 at 03:06 PM

brendan’s comment is:

from the hoefler+frere-jones twitter feed a few days back:

“Bloomberg Businessweek is one good looking magazine. Pass it on”

On Jun.10.2010 at 03:14 PM

Anatoly Vyalikh’s comment is:

It would be better to make new magazine, but not to chenge old one.
New design looks like many others. Previous one had it’s charm and individuality. But to my mind, design of cover is nice.

On Jun.10.2010 at 06:27 PM

Dave’s comment is:

It’s an excellent move. Checked it out when I saw it in London a few weeks ago. Looks bang up to date and so much more professional and serious, yet visually more stimulating.

Can’t believe that previous design was only three years old. But that’s American editorial design for you; safe, and always visually referencing design from about 15 years before the present day.

Don’t see anything wrong with the new one, only a whole lot of right, and so much less bland.

On Jun.10.2010 at 08:43 PM

Michael Bierut’s comment is:

I love the new design and became, for the first time ever, a subscriber because of it.

On Jun.10.2010 at 10:09 PM

Sanjay’s comment is:

I am yet to digest the change. Yet to see it in print.

P.S: @Armin, when you are talking about organizing information, you mean to say ‘readable’ and not legible. Correct me if I am wrong.

On Jun.11.2010 at 01:39 AM

Networking Events’s comment is:

Looks as lots more is going on. So maybe that is a good thing when trying to catch a new and younger subscribers market. Although, I do think it looses some of its credibility with - going all colourful and wacky. It is after all a business magazine.

Bernd

On Jun.11.2010 at 03:08 AM

jen’s comment is:

I think it’s a smart move away from those gray, contrast-free blocks of type. The added colors to the spreads bring interest and contrast, and more entry points on the page make it more interesting with less copy. Magazine designers are always trying to find ways to break up copy. It’s nice to have a base design that predicts this…once you get the writers writing to form, the whole thing kind of runs itself. Some of the spreads are maybe a little too enthusiastically done.

To be honest to my (magazine art director) eye, this looks to be influenced more by the front matter of men’s lifestyle magazines than People. It feels more like a cheeky approach to business than a shameless pitch to younger readers. The mark captures that and is well-done but not really interesting.

Overall, the best thing they’re doing with the new look is busting the grid. BusinessWeek was so boringly, terminally locked to the grid. While they may have got a little crazy on the inaugural, just to see a business-y magazine breaking those dang squares is so, so very nice.

Some days, you feel like the grid solves your problems…other days, it stands in a corner and taunts you. I am not making this up.

On Jun.11.2010 at 10:20 AM

jen’s comment is:

Also keep in mind they are likely printing to coated groundwood with an 85 brightness, and those bright colors will be significantly more muted in a printed piece. (That is just a guess about the stock.)

On Jun.11.2010 at 10:22 AM

MSGDS’s comment is:

The redrawing of Helvetica is very well done, and I really appreciate the new design, but I think the logo has lost its charm that the old one had.

On Jun.11.2010 at 02:26 PM

Steve’s comment is:

All US business magazines would be wise to try to understand why The Economist is the only newsweekly with rising circulation and ad pages.

On Jun.14.2010 at 02:06 AM

Mary Shu’s comment is:

An excellent redesign, masterfully handled.

On Jun.14.2010 at 11:15 AM

Miguel’s comment is:

The execution is superb. It’s gorgeous.

It’s about 75% Guardian and 25% Economist, graphically speaking. It should look like the Guardian since it was designed by someone on that newspaper’s staff.

Whether or not this is a good thing can be debated.

On the negative side, I tend to think this modernist, very English-style design which emphasizes grotesque typefaces, grids and very heavy use of rules is beautiful but a bit dated. Talk about referencing the 80s, the Guardian’s famous designed based on Helvetica was done in the 80s. The Guardian’s current design is brilliant because it retains some of those features but advances the cause by using that gorgeous slab serif by Christian Schwartz that bears the same name of the paper.

On the positive side, this style is much tighter than what is typical of American editorial design. It’s greater density gives the appearance of having more or better information and analysis. I can’t help but think that it is perfect for the business reading audience. They like publications that look serious and seem to have lots of data.

I see this redesign as going after the regular reader of The Economist. Bloomberg wanted it to appear more serious and more dense. Kudos to this team, I think they got it right.

On Jun.14.2010 at 04:24 PM

RueArchimede’s comment is:

Well written design review.

My biggest question is what is Bloomberg’s new added value for readers and whether we can really call it a rebrand or just a visual facelift?

On Jun.19.2010 at 11:24 AM