Categories Media Uncategorised What’s wrong with the Daily Mail (typography)? Post author By Carrie Post date October 21, 2008 13 Comments on What’s wrong with the Daily Mail (typography)? Is it just me, or does the typeface used for the bullet points in this boxout (from the Daily Mail) really suck? It’s used for body text in lots of the paper, and it makes my eyeballs bleed. ← Bad Science: buy it, read it, send it to Gillian McKeith for Xmas → Get a free Eels live EP (if you do it before the 28th) 13 replies on “What’s wrong with the Daily Mail (typography)?” yea x-height (height of lower case x and most lower case letters) is way too much, compared to the height of the upper case letters What jumped out at me was the lack of tracking in the headline, which to me at first glance said “ATTHEPUMPS”. This is a sure sign of using free and/or cheapie fonts, which are not created with the mathematical precision of “professional” fonts. Yeah, the spacing’s away to hell in the bullet points too. It’s really hard to read – it’s like being mugged in the eyes. Andi, do you think the x-height would work okay if the lines were further apart? It’s not a bad typeface, I don’t think, but the way it’s being used is awful. Do you not think it’s kinda appropriate. When you read the mail you should hear it in your head AS IF BARRY SCOTT FROM THE CILLIT BANG ADVERTS IS READING IT. The typeface sorta suits that. Are you sure this is a mail story? It doesn’t seem to mention what effect this will have on house prices at all… It’s a perfectly good font for headers. It shouldn’t be used for sentences. You see a lot of that these days. There are good reasons to use sans-serif fonts for on-screen use ’cause of pixelation, but, in print, prose should be in serif. Aside from that, the “r” curves down too far. Creates an odd break wherever it appears. > It doesn’t seem to mention what effect this will have on house prices at all… Heh. Well, yesterday’s lead was “House prices ‘to plummet by 35%’ – the biggest ever fall in Britain”. Maybe, but it is too tight all over. i’d only use that body font for tables or lists. Just had a quick look at mail website and its okay, heavy sans for head with medium sans for body. So in conclusion, yes, it does suck big time. The website isn’t bad at all, works fine on a screen, but the printed paper is really horrible. Some really weird font choices imo. If you go to the website and click on the e-editions link you can view the print version online (needs sign-up for a free trial). Here’s another example: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/10/22/article-1079290-023313D1000005DC-738_468x346_popup.jpg OMG, Apple IIC fonts, LOL. I quite like it. The leading is maybe a bit tight, though. Leave a Reply Cancel replyYou must be logged in to post a comment.