Here is a tour of the new online P.I. It looks kind of like Crosscut:
Then, when you scroll down, you’ll find a bunch of boring pictures:
(Look! A macaw! CAW! CAW! Man, I had a crazy aunt who had one of those. CRAZY!)
And then a lot of old people want to talk to you about Bob Dylan and stuff:
And then it’s time for endless screens of blue words:
And that’s it. The future is now! I’m sure glad they used that 60-day deadline to plan an attractive, groundbreaking website for the future of journalism.
Can we ban people from talking about any rock star from before 1980? Seriously, the Beattles sucked, Elvis was boring and Bob Dylan’s music makes me want to fall into a coma.
Guess what? The fucking 60’s and 70’s werent’ that great people!!!
Dear Paul Constant,
I still love you.
Love, Jocelyn
jesus, are you off your pills, Paul? What did the PI do to incur the impotent, sneering wrath of a books editor at a free weekly?
Although I do agree that an interactive handjob feature would add to their new site, I’m sure they’ll respond to the reasoned, constructive criticism of their dear readers like yourself.
Snark is cheap – leave it to commenters who don’t get paid to write.
Ouch, man.
Personally, it looks exactly the same as their former site and that’s how I like it. I’m just getting over the fact that I will no longer get the paper version of the P-I; I don’t think I could handle a confusing re-design as well on the same friggin’ day.
@1, fuck you — the 80s, 90s and 00s haven’t been any better for pop music
Hey, I don’t see any giant banner ads for tattoo parlors, whores, or anonymous gay sex on the P-I site. What are all those new ad people doing?
i bet those who got laid off aren’t stealing wine
way to say whatever you think you were supposed to say, constant. dope, bruh.
Their last print paper is today, so I’m not sure why their brand-new website would start today too. I’m waiting to see what it’ll look like tomorrow.
@7 Ummm…Brah? Really? You should take Grassley’s advice and adopt the Japanese model of honorably taking responsibility for mixing your bad 80s and 90s slang. That’d be crucial, brody.
Yes, there’s no point in reading any of the articles, like the one where a former police chief of Seattle calls for ending the drug war. That’s not been a constant theme of THIS blog, or anything.
why should the website look any different today? it’s been extremely successful in its current format before they stopped putting news on paper; so there’s not a huge degree of motivation to drastically retool it. ‘
Some of the most successful online news sites (huffpo, drudge) aren’t especially pretty on their front pages.
I always hated those little drawings of authors next to their columns in newsprint – knowing what a columnist looks like always ruined it for me. You want people to know what you look like, go into television. I’m afraid of what web technology will do to exasperate this.
CROSSCUT!!! BOB DYLAN!!! A BUNCH OF BORING PICTURES!!! THE FUTURE IS NOW!!!!
@10: Thanks, Fnarf. I thought the most interesting thing about this post was the fact that it revealed Stamper as a member of the new site. That piece of information is more Slog-worthy than any of the “analysis” in this post…
@12, may I gently suggest “exacerbate” rather than “exasperate”? …Although I do share your exasperation…
Stamper’s such a stoner.
Yeah, jeez, they could’ve used that time to turn their Website into some Flash-heavy, resource-grabbin’, takes-forever-to-load monstrosity like the Slog. Ground breaking, indeed.
It looks 100% exactly the same as their old site…except they added the “Seattle Views” and “Seattle Tweets” sections. What is the point of your virtual tour?
I have to agree with Paul on this one.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
@15 – yours doesn’t seem injudicious enough! Or, maybe?
@9
lol