I am a big fan of this newspaper and would greatly miss getting a “hard copy” six mornings a week to read with my morning coffee. Happily, it appears that those in charge aren’t planning to cave in to the ever-encroaching world of online news only. So when I find something I don’t like about the paper, it is in a constructive fashion that I complain. I have welcomed most of the changes made in recent months, but do not find the current visual format pleasing to my eyes or mind. It is what one could call “Recorder light and bright” with too much of each.
Comparing it with an old-style copy, I find that the headlines are less bold than before and the type within each article is appreciably lighter and smaller — and this isn’t because I’m 70 years old as I have excellent short-range vision. Perhaps some of this is an optical illusion, but it makes it harder for me to read easily and clearly, particularly in sections like the obituaries and entertainment listings.
In addition, the paper has increased its use of color both in photographs and mini-headlines and such (“Death” is printed in green while “Notices” is in gray which looks silly.) Now while I accept some color as being of benefit, I hope you’re using color dyes that aren’t toxic. Still I’d prefer it to be “black and white and read all over” as the old riddle goes (and black and white photos are an art form compared to most color shots) — this is too much! The over-use of red and green makes me think it’s Christmas every day and the splashy hues and flashy style are too reminiscent of USA Today — hardly a paragon of journalism. I may read that paper while on vacation but don’t want to see it when I’m home in western Mass.
DAVID FERSH
Charlemont