Callum: Double Page Spread Analysis (NME)

NME Double Page Spread: “Fifty Best Albums Of 2010” (4th December 2010)

I chose to do this as my double page spread analysis because this type of article is what I’m basing my feature article on. The first thing that sticks out to me is the complete usage of staged stock images in the article. In the first two pages at least, there are no original images. They only use stock images that the band gives out for publicity material or images that were already taken by the magazine in a previous issue or feature on the band. This is both practical for the magazine (far easier than sending out a photographer to take brand new individual images for each band) and more cost effective for the magazine.

The feature sticks to a roughly four colour scheme of black, white, pink and green with two colour choices for each section. Black and Pink for the album entries and White and Green for the lists that are dropped in randomly on the pages. This creates a colourful and easy to read design that feature text that are very easily readable on their backgrounds. Said backgrounds have lots of white space which works for the readable style the feature is going for.

Text is organised into tight columns with black dotted lines being shown to separate the individual columns and entries. This makes a nicely organised and very tidy design with very clear separation between the individual columns and entries. Most albums get small and succinct explanations for their inclusions, but others get expanded pieces with a stock image of the band and, in this case, a short Q&A on the band’s reaction to being featured. This works for the length of the issue because the feature needs to be able to fit in the issue and shines a spotlight on those bigger artists that the magazine frequently trumpets.

The byline for each entry is reserved to just the initials of the author of that particular entry and comes at the end of the text. Less “byline” more “signature”. This is presumably done both to save space and due to the list being decided by the whole staff instead of just one writer. The only time this changes is at the end of an extended entry which features the author’s full name; fitting considering the extended nature of these entries.

Mostly unrelated lists and band member specific favourite albums are spliced onto the page. The lists are featured in the columns whilst the band specific quotes are squeezed in between the columns. The lists being in the columns makes it seem like they are just as necessary to read as the rest of the article and mean you just read them as the article goes. Not jumping straight to them. They are, however, separated in a green box in order to inform you they are not part of the actual article.

The band specific favourites, on the other hand, are in a circle with a grey background, a “My Album Of The Year” in the green background (and white text) that the lists have wrapped around the edge of the circle. Finally, there is a cropped image of the band member who the feature is referring to next to the entry. This completely seals off the entry from the rest of the article, draws attention to it and the photo helps the reader recognise who the band member is.

The headline is a mixture of multiple styles. Whilst the headline is entirely in San Serif; the “Fifty” is bigger than the rest of the headline, in bold and black. The “Best Albums Of 2010” is slightly smaller than the “Fifty”, italicised and begins in pink but slowly turns green the further to the right it gets. This makes it stand out and introduces the colour scheme that the rest of the article will be using.

The lead of the article takes up the bottom of the first half of the first page of the article. It’s in bold and remains in San Serif for emphasis. In the third quarter of the page there is an advertisement that tells you to go to the magazine’s website in order to get more info on each of the entries, a very subtle attempt to get more hits for the website I presume.

The entries for each album are written in two different colours, fonts and styles. On the shortened entries, the number is black and in bold, the artist is in pink, the album is in black, the record label the album comes from is in brackets, not bold and smaller than the rest of the entry. All of the text is italicised. This makes it easy to read, separates the different information and fits the colour scheme. Things change on the extended entries. The number isn’t in bold, the artist’s name is black and not italicised and bigger than the rest of the info text. The album name is also in pink instead of black. This is presumably to show the difference between the smaller entries and the extended ones.

Each entry also features the artwork next to the info. This makes it look more professional and is a good point of reference for those who may remember the album in question from the artwork instead of the name.

The lead of the article and the extended entries both get a stylistic bullet point that incorporates the colour scheme of the article. This is done, presumably, to add special emphasis to those entries and to draw attention to them quicker.

As for the copy; it’s extremely informal. Even by NME standards. “Are you, like us, compulsively driven to mentally machete the continuous sensory assault that is human existence into small manageable chunks and then rearrange the severed bleeding portions into nice numbered lists so as to give some semblance of order to your farcical and chaotic life?” By using complex words and lengthy sentences the magazine attempts to appear more sophisticated, but I personally find it just comes off as pretentious.

The actual entries aren’t much better. “Anyone still dumb enough to use the 'e' word, well, fuck off and listen to Brother or something.” It tries to sound chatty and avoid sounding very self absorbed (seeing as the magazine is listing what it thinks are the 50 best albums this year and, as such, all your opinions on them are wrong) but comes across as rather immature. Especially with the swear words.

So, there are several things that I can gleam from this double page spread for my similar feature. For a start, my copy is not going to be so informal or juvenile. Considering our intended audience (late 20 to early 30 year olds), I'll need the text to be authoritative but also slightly informal in order to keep it from seeming too snobby or the reader from being too bored. This may be a tight line to walk.

I'll be taking the simple colour scheme that makes things clear and easy to read, however the copious amounts of white space will not be coming with it. I plan to create an interesting background to the article that will be interesting for the reader to look at yet still fit with our intended tone. The extra lists and band specific bubbles will not be utilised, with all focus instead being left on the countdown. All entries (at least in the early goings) will get the exact same amount of attention and detail and space with no one band getting preference over the other. The album artwork for each entry will also be used. And bylines will be restricted to the initials of the entry's author, although this is for space reasons more than anything else.

The first page of the Double Page Spread will be dedicated to the title and the lead paragraph. Although mine will be considerably less... 'verbose' than the NME's one. The actual countdown will start on page 2 of the feature.