38 comments

  • Joshua SortinoJoshua Sortino, almost 6 years ago (edited almost 6 years ago )

    In another statement, Mr. Smith said that Mr. Topolsky had set traffic records, doubled traffic from social media and spurred double-digit revenue growth. Mr. Micklethwait called Mr. Topolsky “one of the most creative digital journalists that I have met.

    Seems strange not to trust someone who has had such a positive impact on the company. It seems Mr. Boomberg may not have a full understanding of design's purpose. I know the website could use improvement, but I don't think Joshua had all of the time he needed to fulfill his vision.

    15 points
    • Sam SolomonSam Solomon, almost 6 years ago

      What is the source of that statement?

      2 points
    • Nic TrentNic Trent, almost 6 years ago (edited almost 6 years ago )

      Via: http://joshuatopolsky.com/post/123817628197/hello-again

      "Let this sink in a bit: we launched two completely new (award-winning, beautiful, inventive) websites and founded our first regional site (hi Europe!); hit new traffic records (like surpassing the WSJ for the first time); become the leader in business digital video (we grew audiences nearly 350% YoY); nearly doubled our social traffic (all time highs in every metric, a 358% increase in Facebook traffic YoY); PLUS we saw double digit revenue growth in digital.

      But more important than revenue or numbers, the editorial work I had a chance to be a part of was some of the strongest and most interesting stuff anyone anywhere has been doing. Things like Paul Ford’s outrageously great What is Code, data viz storytelling like This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind and our 2015 Weed Index, or our 80’s-drenched oral history of junk bond kings, a feature about mutant big game hunting in South Africa, the tale of a sad drill in Seattle, or, you know, this insane Paul Krugman thing. To say nothing of the killer photo essays we did for Pursuits, or the fantastic new video our team has been creating. The list goes on and on. We’ve been making a lot of cool shit."

      2 points
    • Jacob TaylorJacob Taylor, almost 6 years ago

      Just because you are getting more clicks, doesn't mean the quality has improved.

      Clearly Bloomberg (the man) cares more about netting a specific audience than just increasing 'engagement' or clicks on the site.

      I certainly enjoyed what Topolsky did, but it's understandable that Bloomberg might be concerned about how the changes effected the publications brand/perception.

      0 points
  • pjotr .pjotr ., almost 6 years ago (edited almost 6 years ago )

    It's interesting because, while I wasn't a previous heavy Bloomberg reader, I found their new content to be on point.

    It's a shame they had to really go off the deep end in regards to the visual design of the site. I'm all for making things more intriguing and different but you have to know your audience.

    8 points
    • Jim SilvermanJim Silverman, almost 6 years ago

      off the deep end is the perfect way to put this.

      404

      10 points
    • James MejiaJames Mejia, almost 6 years ago

      Same, I loved their articles like Big Bertha or the big code breakdown.

      I was also a big reader of The Verge when he was on it. Lately the quality of articles has really dipped. I hope the same doesn't happen when he leaves Bloomberg.

      3 points
    • Braden HammBraden Hamm, almost 6 years ago

      I think the audience is the big thing. Michael Bloomberg is the audience. If he didn't like it, then most of their readers wouldn't either.

      1 point
    • Nic TrentNic Trent, almost 6 years ago

      It is exciting to wonder where he will go next.

      0 points
    • Mackenzie DavidsonMackenzie Davidson, almost 6 years ago

      I don't like how every time Bloomberg comes up on DN someone makes a comment about how they've "gone off the deep end" or something along those lines.

      It's a shame that their designers are really innovating in digital and for the most part the DN community doesn't seem to support it because it doesn't fall under the "safe" visual language that seems to get upvoted the most here.

      4 points
      • Liam SarsfieldLiam Sarsfield, almost 6 years ago

        Couldn't agree more.

        1 point
      • pjotr .pjotr ., almost 6 years ago

        So innovative is using Helvetica, neon colors, poor legibility within type headlines, random pixel art gifs, borders on text, and thick underlines?

        I'm failing to make the connection there.

        Innovative to me is pushing the envelope of the reading experience, perhaps incorporating more interactive elements, using video in an interesting way, making the content more contextual, etc.

        2 points
        • Mackenzie DavidsonMackenzie Davidson, almost 6 years ago

          You are evaluating innovation each individual component that comprises it, rather than what the sum of all those elements becomes.

          I think that that's narrow thinking.

          Innovative to me is pushing the envelope of the reading experience, perhaps incorporating more interactive elements, using video in an interesting way, making the content more contextual, etc.

          They are also doing all of this ^ Doesn't seem like you've given Bloomberg a fair chance because you disagree with their aesthetic direction.

          0 points
  • Kyle ConradKyle Conrad, almost 6 years ago (edited almost 6 years ago )

    Such a shame - felt like they hired him away from The Verge in order to lead and rejuvenate the Bloomberg site/redesign. He did just that, really pushing it to the limits - with rumors of Bloomberg himself getting way more hands on, that doesn't bode well for them overall.

    (Of course, who knows how the new site performed against goals and actual metrics and all. But it seemed to have received TONS more press lately with their big features.)

    6 points
    • Account deleted almost 6 years ago

      I think you're onto something when bringing up metrics/goals. In the end, for a site like that, numbers are king. You can generate all the buzz in the world with great design, but great design alone isn't enough. You need great content... and as much as it pains me to know this... there are a lot of times where what we consider amazing design doesn't really resonate with the audience they need it to. Some time, it simply doesn't pay the bills.

      I think as a whole, this is tough pain-point for the online news industry. You need ad revenue, you need active users, and you need great content... and a lot of times each of those things demands vey unique - and often opposing - solutions.

      3 points
      • pjotr .pjotr ., almost 6 years ago

        I think you're right to a certain extent.

        I personally thought the Bloomberg design was so bad that it had to be some type of performance art piece or philosophical statement about contemporary economics...

        That being said...I think you can have exceptional design and attract that older "mba-ish" type audience. A great example is the NYT. They've created some stunningly well designed products in the past few years and they've seen more success because of it.

        The Bloomberg design was more like you gave a hipster the keys to the castle and they ended up painting the walls neon.

        4 points
        • Kyle ConradKyle Conrad, almost 6 years ago

          Has the NYT seen more success because of it? Certainly buzz (much like the Bloomberg articles), but I read somewhere that they were spending boatloads of money on some of those longform over-designed articles they were posting - money that has to come from somewhere (and I doubt the NYT coffers are still that full after all these years).

          I do wonder what the actual metrics are on things like the NYT and Wapo and other "big" news sites of their ilk (print turning digital, primarily).

          1 point
          • Patrick NeufmillePatrick Neufmille, almost 6 years ago

            "I read somewhere that they were spending boatloads of money on some of those longform over-designed articles they were posting - money that has to come from somewhere (and I doubt the NYT coffers are still that full after all these years)"

            If ever you come across that article, it sounds like an interesting read.

            0 points
            • Kyle ConradKyle Conrad, almost 6 years ago

              Yeah, I'm going to try to find it again - it was a semi-breakdown and discussion of those long form "art directed" stories they've done, and had a cost estimate a lot higher than I would have expected. REALLY wish I had saved it somewhere now haha

              0 points
  • Jason PerezJason Perez, almost 6 years ago

    I've been reading more of Bloomberg since the redesign. And their daily emails — it's the only newsletter I've opted-in to and continue to enjoy.

    Image alt

    4 points
  • Nic TrentNic Trent, almost 6 years ago

    Haha... his Twitter post https://twitter.com/joshuatopolsky/status/619542326797402113

    3 points
  • Jonathan ShariatJonathan Shariat, almost 6 years ago

    How is this designer news?

    2 points
  • Justin Delabar, almost 6 years ago

    This is super unfortunate if true. Sounds like Michael Bloomberg is getting hands-on, which I can't imagine Josh would enjoy.

    2 points
  • Robert NiepiekloRobert Niepieklo, almost 6 years ago

    Josh has made a statement on his departure.

    http://joshuatopolsky.com/post/123817628197/hello-again

    1 point
  • Ch EdiCh Edi, almost 6 years ago

    Big deal for every media company outside … I felt like the Bloomberg environment is the perfect place for Joshua. Very bad for both parties.

    1 point
  • Jordan KoscheiJordan Koschei, almost 6 years ago

    Clearly, he's leaving to focus on his music career as frontman of the band Big Data.

    Josh Topolsky Big Data

    0 points