NEWSPAPER PACEMAKERS
View award list/gallery
Four-year Daily
Summary comments on selected newspapers:
Strong use of design to tell a story. Use of graphics to draw a read into the text.
Consistent use of “real people” to lead off a story and illustrate the point of the story.
Good mix of features and hard news to appeal to all readers
Mix of local news and campus news, for example a story on what local elections mean to students and the campus community
Good use of special effects – a wrap around the paper to highlight a special focus on a sports team.
Mixing ‘new media’ and ‘old media’ by highlighting what’s on the website on the front page of the print edition.
Summary comments for non-selected newspapers:
Failure to grab readers on the front page
Not enough visual entry points
Failure to capitalize on headlines
Lack of news judgment – for example no new angle explored in a second day story
Design lacks visual hierarchy
Lack of reader entry points and inside teasers
Formulaic design
Images were not well used.
Four-year non-daily
Summary comments – Selected newspapers
Consistent excellent combination of presentation and editorial content
Top papers combined design and editorial in a way that invited and engaged reader interest
Produced editorial content that whether national, state or local was relevant to campus life
Presented content with clean and compelling design
Crafted stories with interesting leads, multiple sources and a sense of how the story was relevant to the life of the reader
Comments on non-selected newspapers
Images were not of high quality, had poor reproduction or were not well used
Poorly executed design
Lack of contrast in design
Inappropriate font choices
Mixing of fonts in non-complimentary manner
Lack of demonstration of event driven design
Design was too formulaic
Inability to use above the fold to sell the newspaper
Demonstrated an ability to gather news but an inability to engage readers to read it
Not enough visual entry points
Poor news judgment in front page story selection
Inferior headlines and cutlines or no cutlines, lacking attribution
Two-year
Summary Comments – Selected newspapers
attractive design that engages readers in content, use of multiple entry points
Crisp, authoritative headlines
Strong use of art and graphics – sharp, clear, well selected images
Consistent links between editorial coverage and front-page news coverage
Demonstrated excellent and audience specific news judgment
Summary Comments for non-selected newspapers
Poor design
Inappropriate font choice
Lack of demonstration of event driven design, design was too formulaic
Inability to use above the fold to sell newspaper
Poor news judgment in front page story selection
Inferior headlines and cutlines or no cutlines, visuals lacked attribution
Inconsistent coverage
Stale sports coverage of events days old
Lack of strong editorial leadership
Lack of ‘sparkly’ writing
ONLINE PACEMAKERS
View award list/gallery
Small schools
Overall, judges were treated to a number of excellent sites that rival professional newspaper sites. Blogs, video, podcasts and even mobile formats add up to effective use of the digital medium, reaching audiences where and when they want. Writing and editing were clear, and stories were well told. There was also frequently a display of journalistic bravery, taking on taboo or controversial topics. But it was also nice to see a sense of fun as these young journalists use social media and other tools available to engage their audiences. The photography and video work on our finalists’ and winners’ sites was mostly outstanding, too. These are complete packages that should make their campuses proud.
Large schools
Student writing, editing, photography and story selection generally is good among the top online newspapers. What distinguishes the very best from the rest is the care the staffs take to present the news online in the best way possible. The best sites have attractive, user-friendly designs, and compelling, web-original content that’s refreshed regularly. Blogs are about important topics, are maintained and updated. Multimedia selections are varied and well-executed. It’s clear when students recognize the story-telling power of the medium rather than simply push print content to the web. They are the students with the brightest futures as journalism continues to evolve.
Magazines
An impressive display of visually interesting presentations. Much time and care is put into the layout and design of these sites. Multimedia storytelling is the highlight of the content. Good writing, compelling photography and enticing video combined to give the audience an immersive experience in campus life. Since these publications are based mostly on infrequent deadlines, many still struggle a bit with frequency and timely updating of content. But the presence of blogs, podcasts, social media and other elements show how much progress has been made. The best publications offer a full menu of timely, relevant information, artful storytelling and audience interactivity. The future of journalism is in good hands with these talented students.
Online-only
Judges noted that the winning sites displayed excellence in providing fresh news content in all sections, not just one. Stories are published at different times of the day, as well. Clean design was an important factor. Content that was relevant to university life was also important. Lots of social networking use was used in the top sites.
MAGAZINE PACEMAKERS
View award list/gallery
Feature
We were extremely impressed with the state of collegiate magazine journalism. None of us judges had publications as good as these submissions when we were in college. So right off the bat, before we even got to selecting the finalists, we were encouraged about the state of magazine journalism. If the students producing these books are the industry’s future magazine-makers, then the industry will be in very good hands.
Choosing the ten finalists was difficult. We were struck by several things about the ten magazines that made our cut. They demonstrated a certain level of confidence (even, in some cases, cockiness) that made reading them engaging and surprising. They swung for the fences, and their ambitions were supported by strong writing, smart display copy, and assured (in some cases inspired) art direction. What set the best of the best apart from their peers was sophistication and consistency, one of the hardest things to achieve in a magazine. Our top three picks (Flux, from the University of Oregon, Fusion, from Kent State, and Think, from Drake University) were extremely strong from front to back. These three books demonstrated a real mastery of the many moving parts that make for great magazines—a good balance of subject matter; a sense of how to be provocative without being tasteless or immature; a seriousness of purpose matched by a sense of humor and fun; and a sophisticated visual vocabulary. The feature stories in Flux impressed us with their curiosity, their boldness, and the strength of their execution. The magazine also made good use of its Web site with videos supporting the stories. Serious subjects were handled well in “I Want to Be In Playboy” and “Consumed By Food,” but in both cases “serious” did not mean “dull.” The photos in “No Shave, No Shame” were wonderful. Fusion and Think also displayed a expert ability in both editorial content and art direction. All three books bore the marks of editorial teams that understand their missions. These books did not feel like a hodge-podge of random journalistic ideas. They felt like magazines.
The remaining seven were also very impressive. Mostly what set them apart from the top three was that they weren’t as consistent from front to back, or they weren’t as ambitious. We enjoyed the charming energy in Webster University’s The Ampersand, and were thrilled by the intensity and ambitions of Panorama, though the writing in some instances was not up to the level of the design. The remaining books all had their strong points, from “The Nazis Next Door,” in Ethos, a well-reported and well-written piece that impressed us all, to the dense (sometimes too dense) but delightful pages of Inside, from Indiana University at Bloomington.
After reading these ten magazines we had to conclude that the future of journalism is strong. There was a good balance of exactly the kind of experimentation and execution, audacity and reverence, that collegiate magazines should have. All ten books felt as if they had been created by editors, writers, photographers, and designers who were fired up, excited to communicate their visions, and passionate about mastering the dynamic skill set that goes into producing a magazine.
Literary/Art
Windhover was by far the most outstanding journal we considered. Its overall design was highly polished and clean-cut, unifying a diverse but consistent set of elements. The journal displayed an inspiring understanding of the relationship between text and image, while creatively controlling each page’s supporting graphic elements. Windhover was very strong in its inclusion of non-literary contributions, including audio, architecture, and fashion/textile design as mediums to be explored. Both prose and poetry contributions were excellent, but we voiced the concern that the design could outweigh the contributions if not kept in control. There was some repetition in the list of contributors, and we were curious as to their selection process. We would welcome seeing the next volume of Windhover outside of a judging capacity.
Colonnades, amongst all the journals we considered, was the most unified and clean in its design approach. The elegant, consistent type treatment, coupled with just enough white space for both the art and the text blocks to live in, made for very easy reading. Additionally, the inclusion of book reviews and the use of a blind submission process were also admirable. Oddly enough, considering the last point about the submission process, the contributions were slightly lacking on the diversity side. A number of names appeared more than twice in the book, suggesting solicitations weren’t as energetic as they could have been, or the process isn’t quite as “blind” as it could be. The only other suggestion we had was to consider different paper types. While the stock in use for this issue works quite well for the text, it is not as flattering to the art. All in all, a fabulous, very professional effort that is eminently good as is.
Sanskrit contained a well-balanced combination of poetry, prose, and artwork. Distinctive type treatments and other design elements were used consistently throughout the volume to accentuate each genre and successfully encouraged us to dive into the featured work. Particularly for the prose pieces, the page design creatively corresponded to the action or themes in the text and went above and beyond to do so (a favorite example of this was “Our Friend the Professor” on page 31). Though some featured work was stronger than others, the quality of the content suggests the editors facilitated the selection process well. At times, the volume could have benefited from more thoughtful composition and pairing of work on facing pages. Trim size (7×11) was unique and was combined well with interior page layout, though the title page seemed at odds with the rest of the journal’s interior design. We had mixed feelings about the cover design, which was classy but also somewhat uninspired. Overall, however, Sanskrit’s staff should feel very proud of their efforts and this resulting volume.
American River Review was an intriguing mix of prose, poetry, photography, essays, paintings and illustrations, fashion, and recipes. The overall design was well executed, with thoughtful attention paid to laying out a complex mix of contributions. Although we appreciated the unique design of the Table of Contents, we would have enjoyed more editing in terms of the number of pieces per individual contributor. Again, we were curious as to their selection process. In comparison to the other journals in its category, ARR10 was cleanly designed, and developed as a complete project and piece. We felt that it would benefit from a smaller trim size, but were impressed overall with the color reproduction, printing, and paper.