Hmmm... I haven't looked at an issue since I left the east coast. This looks a lot better. Still too text dense, needs more images, but It's nice that there were none of those beefy white guy logos and images from 1905.
The new Industrial Worker lay out
Quote:
It's nice that there were none of those beefy white guy logos and images from 1905.
i agree. a sense of history and roots is important, but unless the IWW starts unionising gaybars i think it's best to leave the muscly men (other than me, of course) out of our publications 
ftony wrote:
Quote:
It's nice that there were none of those beefy white guy logos and images from 1905.i agree. a sense of history and roots is important, but unless the IWW starts unionising gaybars i think it's best to leave the muscly men (other than me, of course) out of our publications :)
There's an old cartoon but its in the history section (and its a woman) and then there's some of the classic materials in the merchandizing section. That seems to be about right.
I've always wondered though... those images are classic because they were the artwork from a particular time. Those artists were speaking to the workforce then. The IWW has to have some decent artists in y'alls membership. Why not have some new logos and cartoons and such? The face of the workforce is different. I used to read the IW when I'd pull my shifts at Black Planet Books. All I could think was how alienating it would look to the Baltimore workforce when every image was either one of those strapped white guys with a sledge hammer or a modern pic of some scraggily-looking white mostly guys now.
I hate to say it but... the general workforce has no idea what Industrial Worker actually means. The name screams manufacturing worker to the average person and that ain't the workforce anymore. So it would be a stretch for it to look interesting to folks outside of a certain inclusive group.
x357997 wrote:
http://www.iww.org/en/node/3318
i have the latest one in my email if anyone wants it.
The layout is better, but it takes some getting used to. I just knew that when Jon Bekken edited the paper that it would go after the business unions right and proper. Now, I fear we are getting soft on the whole thing, rather than taking a principled yet understanding approach -- a middle ground.
I think there's less to read now with the new font -- at least it seems that way. The previous editors managed to squeeze in a lot, but of course it became quite dense and hard to follow with the article cuts.
the typefont is less dense, and that's good. it seems from the few isssues so far that the articles are more informative, less strident, and that's good too. i read every article from march, a thing i think i've never done before. the international reporting (iran, e.g.) contains info i haven't seen anywhere else
Hopefully this will make the next IW cut:
To be honest I like the fact that its a bit more sparse on the carping on about the business unions. I think the information should be in there, definitely the article above or like the article on SEIU and Wal Mart a couple months ago, but it does get a little silly doesn't it? I mean really its all fine and good for us to talk a lot of shit about the existing labour movement, but I think its more important to trumpet our own gains, as well as to look at what is happening in the labour movement worth praising. Like the scarborough auto plant occupation, the general strike in Argentina, etc.
The new layout looked way too sparse for me at first glance, but less print per page is easier reading for those who don't read a lot and is worth keeping in mind. As for the name industrial worker I would entertain other names, but there is something to be said for tradition, it's just a shame it run 'Abolish the wages system' on its masthead anymore.
Old mastheads - my favorite slogan which used to be on the top (of Solidarity, I think -- the Eastern Organ) : "One Union, One Label, One Enemy."
I agree w/ EdmontonWobbly that it isn't useful to carry on all the time about how bad the state of organized labor is in North America at least, without putting forward some positive examples. We certainly don't have all the answers in the IWW, and can learn from workers' organizing efforts elsewhere.
I do think we need to continually draw the contrast between the IWW and other labor unions, and certain news such as that SEIU piece, are certainly worth printing.
Ironically I saw this and it was something I thought about as soon as I heard the term "Industrial Worker"
Quote:
Dear Editors,
I am writing to suggest that we
change the name of the IWW paper from
The Industrial Worker to something
else. The criteria for a successful name
would be that it would appeal to a nonwobbly
audience, be fun and enticing
to a non-activist audience, and would
be concerned with the present rather
than the past. I’m well aware that in
Wobbly parlance “industrial” means
“unity of all workers”, but to the average
Joe (or Jane, or Jamal, for that matter)
it just means “boring”. It comes off as
an old left term that has everything to
do with the US’ past as a factory-driven
economy.....
Of course this line of argumentation taken to its logical conclusion means perhaps we should revisit the name 'industrial workers of the world' as it will also be associated with beefy white dudes (the one big white guy so to speak) working in steel mills and other such nonsense. But if you consider the fact that we are the industrial workers of the world, and industrial in our name means something particular how hard really is it to explain that to a worker? Also it provides a good opportunity to actually discuss the meaning of 'industrial unionism' something that doesn't come up in day to day conversation and should probably be one of the first things, right after the preamble to the constitution, we talk to new recruits about.
I won't do a big rant or owt (this time) on design but a couple of the standout things...
Front page really needs something to be marked out as the splash so should have a way bigger headline (that applies for the other pages too, everything needs an easily recognisable lead headline really or the eye gets lost in amongst the text - this is one of the reasons people are saying it's too text-heavy)
Page 3 is the second most important page in the paper (first turn), so I'm wondering why you're killing it with the directory and letters?
Don't leave blank lines at the bottom of articles (eg. pg6 'scottish workers occupy Simclar'), it looks really bad. Basically you should try and line text up on the bottom lines unless you're flowing it round stuff like adverts.
Drop the first line indent - it confuses the eye which is looking for a recognisable 'start' point.
Ruling off needs to be more consistent, eg. on page 10 you've ruled off 'on line picket' and 'scotland IWWs' from each other but not from 'anti war protests' or the second column of 'tightline johnson'
pghwob wrote:
Hopefully this will make the next IW cut:
I posted that to libcom this morning and no one commented.
Saii wrote:
I won't do a big rant or owt (this time) on design but a couple of the standout things...Front page really needs something to be marked out as the splash so should have a way bigger headline (that applies for the other pages too, everything needs an easily recognisable lead headline really or the eye gets lost in amongst the text - this is one of the reasons people are saying it's too text-heavy)
Page 3 is the second most important page in the paper (first turn), so I'm wondering why you're killing it with the directory and letters?
Don't leave blank lines at the bottom of articles (eg. pg6 'scottish workers occupy Simclar'), it looks really bad. Basically you should try and line text up on the bottom lines unless you're flowing it round stuff like adverts.
Drop the first line indent - it confuses the eye which is looking for a recognisable 'start' point.
Ruling off needs to be more consistent, eg. on page 10 you've ruled off 'on line picket' and 'scotland IWWs' from each other but not from 'anti war protests' or the second column of 'tightline johnson'
would you mind emailing the editors?
Generally, I prefer the old layout's additional text, but this new layout does seem more streamlined in some ways... I think the general populace'll get more out of it now, and that's always good. As for the whole old-fashioned thing, I am old fashioned, so I'm not a good person to ask about it, heh; I do think it might be a good idea to have modern Wobblies add some nice new art; perhaps a union of individuals? We'll have to see however, I've never felt like the Industrial Worker's betrayed me.
thugarchist wrote:
pghwob wrote:
Hopefully this will make the next IW cut:I posted that to libcom this morning and no one commented.
poor duke. i admit i didn't notice it, but now i have. so what do you make of it, as an SEIU chap yourself?
Whoops my mistake, was looking at it too big and mixed up the numbers.
While I'm here though, spotted an inset needs to be done from the edge of boxes (5pt is fairly standard) cos the text is too close and looks cramped, and pictures generally shouldn't jut into text like on page 5, looks messy. And on page 9 the headline actually cuts into the text, which runs up around it (major no-no, text should never run up above the headline, looks like there's no top to it and doesn't link properly to the text below the headline)
As someone who also does design for a living and have layed out many magazines/books/newspapers I would say there needs to be more form and thought to the layout. The masthead is a step in the right direction, but, needs a lot more work. style is inconsistent throughout and some lines of text wrap when they arent supposed to.
A good example of where we would want to go is the CNTs paper. Now thats sexy. 
As for content, we as members need to write more. A lot of the content is about things outside the union, as opposed to who we are, what we are doing, criticism, where we want to go, etc, etc.
All in all though, I like the direction that the IW is going in.
I was wondering what wobs and non-wobs thought about the new lay out of the Industrial Worker newspaper. Just cuz its in the wob section doesnt mean you cant be frank!
http://www.iww.org/projects/IW/
http://www.iww.org/en/node/3330