Welcome to our new home

December 4, 2009

David_Schlesinger04x

Reuters is a news power house – our 2,800 journalists in 190 different bureaus around the world are dedicated to being the indispensable news source. News has been in our blood for more than a century and a half, but we’ve always been restlessly innovating and always looking to the future.

For Reuters.com, the future is now.

This is our redesign, a year in the making. That’s a year of extensive discussions with people like you, our elite audience of business professionals, about what would make the site better and faster and easier to use for you as you drive business activity around the world.

We want this to be the world’s best website covering business and finance news, analysis, and opinion. Full stop.

We want you to be able to come for a quick glance at the top headlines, or a longer deep dive into a topic that’s important to you. We want you to scan the output of the 2,800 men and women or hone in on a favorite writer or photographer.

This site is for you; we want it to be your ticket to a wealth of news, information, and analysis presented in a cutting-edge format, including text, video, pictures, graphics, user interaction, and personalization features (try the new toolbar at the bottom of every page).

Remember, too, that this is the front door of Thomson Reuters. In addition to the news you see here, Thomson Reuters is also the world’s leader in providing news, information, services, and technology to healthcare, legal, business, and financial professionals. What that means is that our journalism is professional grade, giving our users the inside edge needed to make important decisions.

We’re proud of our new home, and hope you like it. And this is just the beginning. In the coming months, we will continue to roll out new features and functionality.

Please give us your feedback. Write to csmedia@thomsonreuters.com. And come back often. There’s a world of news we’ve got for you.

David Schlesinger
Editor-in-chief, Reuters

161 comments

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/

Goodmorning! All my mornings start with Reuters. As a spontainious reflection, I feel that the old site was much more synoptic when “scanning” the headlines (my field of interest is very broad). Hopefully it’s a matter of “getting used to”…..
Best regards
Erik

Posted by osterlof | Report as abusive

why do web sites change their layout without asking users – previous layout could be seen in a glance – now have to waste time scrolling all over the place !!!!!!

Posted by albertstahl | Report as abusive

Please. The new version of Reuters is not better. It really is not! I am not adverse to change, but not just change for the sake of change. This new version is not an improvement. Also, once I click on a story, why would I not want to view it one one page? I can understand a front page with many headlines and stories, but once I start to read an article, of course, I want it one page. Simplify your pages. Thanks. Bill

Posted by MrBill | Report as abusive

Great redesign, I love it :-)

Posted by lucaconti | Report as abusive

WOW, radical redesign, this will take a fair bit of getting used to!

My first impression is not good. This reminds me a little of the FT.com redesign which has pretty much led to me never using it anymore.

My reasons:

1) I dislike the trend of moving towards more spaced out sections and bigger fonts on websites. It means less information on first glance. I reckon this probably is something you were actually aiming for. But I fail to see the logic, since a website is (a) not a Powerpoint presentation – where obviously less is more since it is something designed to be talked over, nor a (b) business report – where the aim is to focus the reader on specific conclusions. I go to websites to discover things not be told what is important, hence I like to see a bit more, I don’t mean clutter, just more threads.

2) In tandem with point 1) I also hate having to scroll far down to see the full contents of a front page of a website. It basically discounts anything at the bottom not on immediate view. It’s like having a newspaper with a fold out section at the bottom of the front page, that nobody would ever look at.

3)I hate the now ubiquitous horizontal menus at the top of the page. They are completely counter intuitive. The brain is conditioned from an early age to write lists vertically, never horizontally. And only having 3 sections, you then have to drop down to see submenus, instead of the many old options along the side of the page kind of makes things seem less accessible or hidden.

I think it’s telling that the busiest news website BBC.co.uk/news still uses the vertical menu, is focused mainly on the first click view and provides plenty of interesting threads to pick up at first glance.

All in all, I think the design features employed are better suited to a marketing website, where clean, uncluttered views and emphasis on a few key values are what matter. Not for an information portal, the “deep dive” you talk about seems a lot harder now at expense of the quick glance.

Vincent King

Posted by vk9141 | Report as abusive

Hi,
Great new site. What technology did you choose? Is it Drupal?

Regards
Bren
Rep of Ireland

Posted by Bren | Report as abusive

first – to give you a simply reply to your question as to how I feel about your new homepage is a bit rich and frankly I just ade stuff up so I could answer your question.

second – the layout indicates to me that most of your readers you have accessed to be visual, in fact not readers, as there is a whole bunch of pictures and less articles. It is too too busy.

third – it is more difficult to navigate and find the areas I want to study, your previous homepage was excellent. My wife has similar responses to what I am writing you for what it is worth.

fourth – change for the sake of change is not good unless you think having a new wife every year is good. For me quantity and quality are two different things.

fifth – I have been a multi-daily reader of your website for several years but i must say I am seriously re-considering. I do believe in change if its an improvement but I can not see how in anyway this is an improvement. That’s it for what its worth.

Posted by australia12 | Report as abusive

[...] wrote: This is our redesign, a year in the making. That’s a year of extensive discussions with people [...]

FWIW, I don’t like the new look. It’s too disorganized. The old look had the categories on the side which made finding news of particular interest easy to see. You need that categorized navigation bar back.

Posted by apchar | Report as abusive

The new site looks great. I expect that the digest alerts on my iPhone will be easier to read and access with the bolder typefaces. Thank you!

Posted by slcheney | Report as abusive

Hi .. Can I ask why the banner of the new web site is RED and not the normal Orange color associated with the ThomsonReuters brand. It just looks a bit odd since every other TR logo that I have seen is the orange color.

David E Smtih
TR
Mark Square London

Posted by DavidSmith | Report as abusive

The new design of the web site is disappointing to me. It looks like CNN or Fox. I can only assume that the level of reporting and information I find on Reuters will deteriorate just as your ability to display it on the web has. I am sorry to see you abandon your simple and straightforward presentation.

Posted by cranston | Report as abusive

Hello David,

Congrats to you and your team. Very nice redesign and intuitive navigation. Made it my new homepage. One quick suggestion on that…ask you design crew to include a very visible “make this my homepage” option to automate that process (see yahoo.com). You’ll have many converts for sure.

best

k

Posted by samson05 | Report as abusive

Hi David,

Congratulations for the new look of Reuters News. It looks very very impressive and the contents are arranged in a very user friendly manner. Hope we get to see new ways of presenting news in the near term and more blogs from you.

Regards
Indrani

Posted by Indrani | Report as abusive

Why your default home page is edition U.S

Posted by lemontomato | Report as abusive

It’s about time. I was frustrated with your site before and was actively searching out a new home page. I like the new layout, more current stories, and the grouping of several stories on one link. Very nice.

Posted by Earlthepearl | Report as abusive

Hello,
Nice new design. Can’t wait for more features (screeners,…). ;)

Also, Felix Salmon’s blog is not slowing firefox anymore. ;)

Posted by jjty | Report as abusive

A QUICK GLANCE AT THE NEW LOOK REUTERS IS VERY PLEASING.
I HAVE BEEN REUTERS READER SINCE LAST TWO YEARS.AND FIND
YOU VERY USEFUL IN MY LIFE.I START MY DAY WITH THE REUTERS PAGE ALMOST DAILY.
THE NEW PAGE RATHER FACE OF REUTERS IS VERY EASY TO USE ,
I JUST SCANNED IT AND WRITING IT.
IT IS BETTER THAN PREVIOUS ONE IN FINDING THE TOPIC OF INTEREST.

Posted by drdang12 | Report as abusive

The revamped Reuters.com is truly a vast improvement and now really does look by far the best of the dozen or so news sites that I often access. Congratulations.

Next task: Improve the overall quality of writing. Quite a lot is outstanding, but there is still too much pedestrian stuff and every now and again an easily avoidable error creeps in. A glance back to the rigours of Reuters in circa the 1980s might help!
Vergil Berger, Reuters 1958-92

Posted by Vb888 | Report as abusive

Some lines above have missing letters at the end.

The help associated with hovering over a ? shuts off too fast, I suggest you keep it on until the cursor moves.

Posted by Detroit300 | Report as abusive

Looks good, but you do not need so much space between the lines.

Posted by duvekot | Report as abusive

You MUST include the price of OIL on your front page!

Posted by ctrebla | Report as abusive

Really dislike your new format. I’ve used your site for a long time and its best old feature is that you could see all of the news in a compact, non-bloated format. While people need “white space”, there is entirely too much in this new format. If someone is 80 maybe double spacing is needed, but it quadruples the time needed to read any story and is extremely distracting. I find I am constantly using the up/down arrow or having to manage the page just to get a few paragraphs of basic info. This is extremely annoying. This is really nasty if you are using a small screen. Also the terse, lovely summaries are impossible to find/see. We all loved the ways stories were delineated into the various topic areas. This is lost and content is lost to your reader. All in all….you have lost the best parts of your site. Your information content has always been the best….but you are making us work so hard to get it that I seriously doubt that I will continue to use you as a primary. I’ll go where getting content isn’t so much annoying work.

Posted by corelbelle | Report as abusive

The new format is unusable to me. Pleas bring back the old format.
Thanks

Posted by Boabra | Report as abusive

Site looks great. Congrats!

Posted by ThisCanadian | Report as abusive

I like the old site better.

Posted by tchung262 | Report as abusive

I don’t think the design has improved my “Reuters” experience. It’s actually less practical that it was. I miss lists of articles grouped by subject. “Science & technology”, “Environmental” etc. Those disappeared.
Can I go back to old Reuters.com please?

Posted by aritau | Report as abusive

I don’t care for your new design. I have no idea where anything is because all the categories are gone from the page.
There’s way too much white space in the story titles on the left. My eyes get lost in all the text with no way to break them up.

Posted by VagabondCat | Report as abusive

This is perhaps the dreariest new website I’ve seen. It looks as if it was designed by somebody who is incredibly dull.

Posted by smartwords | Report as abusive

I can’t find any health news or topics to follow other than technology, deals and something else.

Posted by TracyIndiana | Report as abusive

Really enjoying the redesign so far! I appreciate that you are separating opinion from news in a world that so often mistakes one for the other. In addition, the dashboards are great, and I’m looking forward to digging in.

Only issue I’ve noticed so far is that the blogs seem to cut off words that should wrap on occasion – could be my screen resolution but I will send it to the CSMedia team.

Also – moderated comments? Just need to be careful with that. I appreciate minimizing the noise but if folks feel like they’re being censored you may run into a backlash. That said – comments will generally be much more useful when they do get posted.

Posted by sailfast | Report as abusive

I’m kind of underwhelmed and overwhelmed by the new design at the same time. I don’t like the oversized drop down menu at the header. Why is it so frack’n huge? Categories are difficult to sort through and the stories are very easy to get buried except for the featured articles. It’s a little cleaner and sort of prettier but certainly not more functional. Total FAIL! IMO. I have a feeling this site was redesigned either for a baby-boomer or by a baby-boomer with bad vision poor spatial organization and weak reading comprehension. Oh well my favorite news site has evolved, hopefully I get used to it but I doubt it.

Posted by Preditor | Report as abusive

New landing page looks fantastic sans all the quick info. I used to get in a 360 degree view.

Neverthless I enjoy Reuters data very much.

Good Luck to all out there in setting this up.

RK

Posted by rangakri | Report as abusive

Everything is too spread out. I like to see a lot at first glance, then choose what to read.

Posted by cwjames | Report as abusive

WHY? I was happy the day I discovered Reuters online. Further, I used it twice a day and it was the first place I’d go when I logged on. Now it looks like any other newspaper online and their are millions to choose from since most use reuters feeds. So, why bother.

What I liked most about Reuters is a little bit of everything on the main page. This site is BORING. Yuck! Too bad someone took a winning solution and ruined it.

I’ll check back everyday for the next week. If this site is not changed, I’m removing it from my bookmarks and using Yahoo or Google news because they “Get It”.

Yahoo even has software which delivers my own local news on the same page.

Posted by badchange | Report as abusive

Is this the website equivalent of urban sprawl? I really enjoyed the compactness of the old design. Now I have to scroll all over to find articles of interest. This is a giant step backwards for me and will probably result in my using other news providers.

Posted by bmf_88 | Report as abusive

What a shock!
Out on no where,without warning.We are offered this new and improved? Rueters.I just shake my head with dismay.This is NOT a good site to navigate.Its so very bland.Choose a country to read their news and you have to back page through how ever many pages you look at just to get to the main page.Not sure what the person who approved this change thought.Personally? I think it was a waste of time/investment.Sad to say.I’ll miss my daily reads on Rueters and stick with B.B.C.
Good luck Rueters

Posted by ramblin_on | Report as abusive

NOT ENOUGH NEWS
People on the web tend to read fast and scan. Clicking on items of interest. On your main page you’d be better off having 100 headlines from everything from stocks, business, technology, etc., and very few pics, if you want to attract a wide variety of followers.
TOO SIMPLE
Looks like a Blog w/ some RSS feeds.

Posted by badchange | Report as abusive

No.
Too busy.
The old site with the frames for each section was a good way to view topics of interest at a glance.
Redesigns are ok, but this one is a back step

Posted by Can_Loup | Report as abusive

Pros: Love that the entire content of an article is now displayed on one page vs. having to select “view entire article on one page.”

Cons: The absence of sub-content under the headlines is frustrating as headlines are often misleading. I’d prefer to see a few sentences of content under each headline. Also, the main page still auto-refreshes, which is a pain when you’re in the middle of reading it. Can you create a way for the user to turn off this feature?!?!?! Please!

Summary: You folks still have a lot more work to do to make this reader-efficient.

Posted by ForexEconGeek | Report as abusive

I have to agree with the majority of the comments here — the redesign is a failure. I have used Reuters.com as my homepage since the site was created. The key to its success and usefulness was the ability to scan, ON ONE PAGE, all of the articles/topics of interest. This “ease of use” was due to it’s simple, linear design — a user was able to quickly review all of the headlines and choose which ones he/she was interested in. This put the reader in control. Your new design takes that control away from the reader and gives it to Reuters. By limiting what is on your homepage, you have put yourself into the uncomfortable position of trying to create a “headline” page that pleases everybody — a formula guaranteed to please nobody. You can keep some of the graphic elements of your redesign, but you should immediately go back to the content that was available on your old home page. Without it, Reuters.com is now just like every other news site out there, which will inevitably lead to fewer site visits and fewer Reuters.com fans.

Posted by BenX2120 | Report as abusive

I do not care for your new Web site at all. I cannot find anything I (used to) come to Reuters seeking. I highly suggest either A.) bringing back the old format or B.) employing an honest user experience design team that is focused on usability and not on promising you the moon.

I am sure you were told the Web site will work for years in “the future state of media.” I am sorry to say, Reuters, but you have been sold a bill of goods.

Posted by brandt | Report as abusive

Love the redesign – it was an extremely pleasant surprise this morning. Thanks so much for the hard word!

Posted by mtrichardson | Report as abusive

I made a comment about this article this morning and it’s not here. I made another comment about a Reuters blog yesterday, and it’s not there either. What’s going on?

Posted by TheOracle | Report as abusive

I can’t keep this site as my homepage. I do not have the time to waste clicking and surfing around. Give me my news on one page. Let ME choose what is important to me. The disorganized laundry list of articles on the left side of your current home page is, frankly, a joke. What use is it? It has no organization. There’s no way to scan it. It’s obvious that a graphic designer, and NOT a news reporter, redesigned your site. You’ve done better in the past, so we know you can do better in the future. Just make sure that future is very soon — like next week.

Posted by TheOracle | Report as abusive

Censoring feed back suggests you fear the truth.I’m disappointed with the censoring as well as this new lay out.

Posted by ramblin_on | Report as abusive

I feel the site is a great improvement over the previous site. The open layout give it a look and feel and superior to all other sites in readability. The reuters editors are the best and most un-biased in the world and guiding the home page to most the relevant news of the day saves time. The topic and relevancy improvement I feel will lead me to more timely information acquisition. Please keep up the good work TR. This will remain my home page.

Posted by freedomadvocate | Report as abusive

Just a week ago I wrote to CNN.com saying “Good bye” because they changed their format to mostly fluff. Now the venerable Reuters has done the very same thing. I’m sorry, but it is a major step backward: Totally random terse – almost meaningless – headlines, for starters.

I guess this is Reuters’ way of saying “No more free online journalism from us”.

So be it. I’ll just go back to reading my WSJ over breakfast.

Posted by FATLAT | Report as abusive

Where do we find interest rates—Govts, munis, corps?

Posted by aaaaa | Report as abusive

As an old newspaperman I can see what you want to do. The new web front page looks more newspaperish. The problem is that you’ve decreased the utility that many of us liked in the old page.

Where’s gold and silver prices? Where’s my at-a-glance market index charts? Sure, the old page was busy but you could get a lot of information quickly just by scanning the page. Now, I have to hunt for what I want to see.

I may have to find another site for my home page if the financial information and charts are not up front and on top.

Posted by advaitin | Report as abusive

the new layout look wise is good functionally its horrible. i have been reading Reuters for years for one and only main reasons over the other news sites, due to its simplicity and easy to find things.it was very functional. not too flashy with pics and ads where i loose myself find it.Everything was in a page i could read the headlines and go into details if i wanted too. but now if i want to read the odd enough section i have to scroll through everything even tough i not interested in the topic.looks like i ll be going back to reading on my cell phone to avoid all the clutter or google news.

Posted by Vlad-3 | Report as abusive

Extremely disappointed in the new site. I will have to find my news elsewhere.

Posted by bougigic | Report as abusive

Like many others on this comment list I think your people have made a mistake. Where on the Overview page do I find ALL of the items that were previously listed in excellent order on the left side of the page? The one I especially like was the institutional investor profile. I for one will be searching for another website for information!

Posted by kenmar13 | Report as abusive

you still don’t have a way to get a good print out of a blog column!

Posted by EdK | Report as abusive

DISASTER!!!

Posted by DMcLachlan | Report as abusive

As ex-Reuters, I find it hard to complain. But there are ways to possibly improve.

Perhaps on the home page you could allow visitors to organize the sections of the page any way they want, in certain areas. Some people might rather see Top Sections where Issues in Depth is located. And the Top Sections area at the bottom could best be 6 or 9 or 12 sections with headlines. And I’d increase the number of sub headline links for each of the Issues in Depth entries to about 5-6. On the upper left, the top story would ideally include 3-5 links to related stories and you might in the upper left column, highlight other top stories with their related stories. At the moment, I got a little confused about what that area was (it appears to be links to your latest stories, a news feed).

Also, I do like the dropdown navigation at the top with all the additional content neatly organized. Don’t know how many people will realize that and hover their mouse over it. But you hope people will get comfortable with your new design and learn it quickly. To that end, if you have not already, you should contact disgruntled users to find out exactly what content they missed then work to make that content more visible: chances are other visitors have the same issues.

Overall, though, I like clean web page designs. This is a good example.

Posted by FredFlintstone | Report as abusive

Better looks, poorer functionality. Too much scrolling – that makes users annoyed. It’s particularly bad for screen size challenged users, such as small laptop or especially cell phone. Whoever designed the layout must be fired – I’m telling this as a web developer myself, and Microsoft Certified at that.

Posted by An0nym0us | Report as abusive

Wow – it’s great to read the passion in some of these comments, even when they hate what we’re doing! I feel really gratified that people take Reuters so seriously and are moved to write when we make changes.

To those who love the new site – thanks, and we promise to continue to make it better and easier to use. And from the editorial side, we promise to continue to improve the multimedia content to make this a compelling experience.

To those who hate the new site – thanks to you, too. I understand that your views are motivated by your loyalty to the old design and for how it served you. I can simply promise you that we’ll work to make this new design live up to its potential. I would urge you to experiment with what we’ve got — I personally find the pop out market displays and the pop down menus, all filled with information, to be pretty exciting and useful.

We’ll keep this conversation going.

– Best regards, David Schlesinger Editor-in-Chief

Posted by Schlesinger | Report as abusive

The new layout is horrible. Reuters used to be very easy to navigate and now it’s much more complicated. You guys used to be my first go to but not anymore. Extremely upset with your new “look”. Dumb move you guys!

Posted by Sacorp | Report as abusive

I will like one page that lists everything. I do not want to spend time clicking at different menu and submenus

Posted by juapar2 | Report as abusive

I like the new layout. I especially like the expandable side panels (for all those people asking “where’s my gold and silver?” It’s two clicks away you rube.)

The new layout may be a little spacey and I do miss the topics broken down under category subheads (Science, Politics, Entertainment, etc.) but I’ll get used to it. Heck, I got used to that unstable tool, Glenn Beck, becoming the “voice of independents”.

I can get used to this.

Posted by ThomPhelps | Report as abusive

My god…its awful. I appreciate Reuters desire to innovate, but the “improved” design provides decreased functionality in exchange for what? Ugliness? Previously article link on the front page were conveniently grouped into subsections, why the choice to do away with this in favor of an inconsistent mash-up style? Who exactly are these “people like me” you had extensive discussions with, they certainly have no experience with web design. The new exclusively top to bottom layout is awkward, and the choice to put the large multimedia section strikes me as outright bizarre. Also, I notice articles seem to be shorter and less thorough, is Thompson Reuters attempting to emulate US weekly? Not to mention the sudden appearance of non-objective language… Looks like I’m off to the BBC in search of unbiased news.

Posted by JoshOp | Report as abusive

I started to come to Reuters for solid, uncomplicated news which was cleanly organized.

And now this! A column of slugs on the left which aren’t organized into any system? The essence of the web is simplicity and speed — not reading a row of headlines to see if one might be of interest. Sheesh!

This is classic in the media; someone thinks that “innovating” is building a new news set or creating holographic reporters or, in this case, doing a website redesign.

Look for your traffic to slip immediately….

Posted by fernack | Report as abusive

I have come back to this page 3 times. Every time is the same, Shock! The old webpage had absolutely ALL the new and QUICK info on the front page. Now, it’s just crap! you have to view different pages to find out what’s going on. If it doesn’t go back to some sort of organized headlines, I will look find something else!.

Posted by ctrebla | Report as abusive

I understand its entirely different from the old UI.Guess I am loyal to the old website where i used to see all the headlines under topics in old site.im so lost in the new website that i forgot why i came to the site. Lets see if i get used to this but for sure im missing the old one :(

Posted by pbgcs | Report as abusive

I LOVE this new design so far… I visit the old Reuters everyday and always thought the design was staid. The new design is more intuitive and interactive, yet the design is up-to-date. I’m sure I’ll learn more about the new site as I navigate around. Good job Reuters!

Posted by naysayer47 | Report as abusive

People… give Reuters 2.0 a chance. Yes, the design and layout is new, thus, it will take about 5 minutes to get used to. But that is the price of progress. Get out of your old shell and explore the new features of the redesign.

I’m sure Reuters have thoroughly thought about all ‘your’ issues for over a year before bringing live the redesign.

Did I say I love this redesign?

Posted by naysayer47 | Report as abusive

Admin> The timestamp is wrong. It was 3:50PM EST when I posted my comment, yet the timestamp shows 9:50PM EST.

Posted by naysayer47 | Report as abusive

I stopped here yesterday, and was stunned. It looks just like the AP, lines of headlines to scroll through. Then it mimics the Chicago Sun Times with “related articles” that are days if not weeks old. I’m halfway through the article and start to think, did this happen again? Then I check the date……

I came on this morning and was hoping it had been a nightmare, but it wasn’t. I clicked on another article only to find it was the blog……

Go back……go back…..thank the Lord alertnet is still the same old format. Please don’t change that too.

Posted by Ruabean | Report as abusive

I prefer the organization of the older site which was easier to navigate and simpler.

The new site is very hard to navigate and for digging info. It is not as user-friendly.

Hope some of the suggestions will lead to review of the site accordingly.

Posted by sk5 | Report as abusive

Change can be tough to get used to at first, but Reuters new navigation is actually much, much cleaner – and once you play around, it really is very slick.

The heart of Reuters.com is the content and none of that has changed since yesterday. I find it interesting that people all of a sudden are looking for a new alternative just because of a face lift.

If you search “reuters redesign” on Twitter, it is 9 to 1 in favor of the new site.

My opinion is certainly in favor of this long overdue update.

Posted by mjdehm | Report as abusive

The new site is too much like Der Spiegel. Good news and reporting, but not nearly as simple and conducive to the search for quickheadlines. I like the idea and potential of the new format, but you should retain one main section, in a similar format as the old one, that gives readers the opportunity to get a good overview of top headlines without having to scroll everywhere to look for them. People appreciate good news, but appreciate simplicity much more, especially in the overloaded and ADD world we live in today

Posted by shalomsalaam | Report as abusive

HATE IT! Looks like a throw back to the ’90s. WHY the endless list of topics with no categorization? Mistake, poor design, boring, confusing, I will no longer reach for it first…

Posted by teedog | Report as abusive

It’s awful – I can’t cite a single instance where I’d say anything was better. I come here to find information, not play someones idea of a news maze that can waste my time. I shan’t return.

Posted by Aerynt | Report as abusive

Not great – too many trendy designers have taken over substance .. in an effort to make navigation easier they have spread the content out too far .. essentially you spend you r whole time hunting for stuff that was familiar. I can go to other info sources and get things quicker – ok they might not look so snazy .. but that is not what I come for. Leave the snazz to the 20 somethings – Reuters is not a cocktail bar. You have been mislead.

Posted by vincej | Report as abusive

reuters went from easy reading to dificult readiing, this is disappointing, i hope you change to your former format

Posted by kahuna | Report as abusive

Not really impressed. In fact I’m dissapointed. Too difficult to navigate and find what i am looking for. The old layout was very well organized and made getting a full picture of what is going on in the world much easier to see and navigate. Now all I seem to do is click and click and click…..if I wanted only a brief snapshot of what is going on then I could use a site like CNN which is just a horrible as your new design. Rueters was the site I used for my first stop for news, now I’ll have to start looing for one that has a similar navigation/layout like your previous site.

Posted by persch | Report as abusive

One more thing…scroll…..scroll……scroll……scroll….. sheesh – my finger is tired!

Posted by persch | Report as abusive

Shockingly bad!

Reuters really has gone into the red, the redesign is a total loss. Loss of valuable content, loss of usability and just overall appalling design. Red & blue? Shame on your designers for not remembering the basic rules on the colour wheel.

and isn’t Reuters suppose to be about news, not advertising? It’s the only thing that stand outs on the pages. Feels like one of those free websites where in order to get content I am bombarded by advertising.

And too much scrolling to get any valuable content.

Posted by crhy | Report as abusive

What happened to the section Science and Health? I always enjoyed it, but somewhere in the new system it is lost, at least to me.

Posted by haikubob | Report as abusive

Reuters used to be very easy to navigate and now it’s much more complicated. the redesign is a total loss of valuable content and loss of usability Extremely upset with your new “look”.
I think your people have made a mistake. Where on the Overview page do I find ALL of the items that were previously listed in excellent order on the left side of the page? The one I especially liked was the institutional investor profile.

Posted by Burck13 | Report as abusive

Why so much text and so few photos and video? The story list on the left is so dense and unreadable. There are no page breaks or photos to draw your attention to any one story.

The multimedia section looks nice, but is very buried at the bottom of the page.

Right side of the home page looks great. Nice size photos to draw the reader in.

Posted by sbruno | Report as abusive

It is difficult to figure out what form of advice was given to you by the ‘people like us’ or ‘business professionals’ from whom you consulted.

“Ensure your homepage fits snugly on a widescreen home cinema television”

“Leave the compatibility issues for those who have them”

“Confusing visitors with a maze will amuse them and make more likely to stay longer”

“Information accessibility and web design are mutually exclusive concepts”

I hope that the advice was free. Because in that case, it was worth every dime.

I had come to like Reuters for several years. Even though some aspects of your articles could be seen to have bias or omitted information, the setup and accessibility of your information was exceptional.

In fact, I believe Reuters would have been better served by having a genuine self inspection of its articles for any actual or perceived bias or political leanings. And less served by having a shallow makeover. But then again, media is a business after all.

Now it remains to be seen if this design will ‘grow on me’ or not. The ability to conveniently access information is not something I would consider a fussy or vain expectation.

Posted by defcon86 | Report as abusive

The new home Reuters is far more comfortable! however i have only one request that to make all web pages of Reuters capable of magnification including articles and discussions.Thanks!-Vinod – India.

Posted by vksaini | Report as abusive

I disagree with many of the comments here. I think Reuters was becoming a comfortable old shoe –familiar but perhaps a bit too warn. I love the new layout and the integration of multimedia with stories. I think that people may need to relearn this new pair of sporty shoes but I think that they will find it snappy and smart as I have.

Posted by danaeg7 | Report as abusive

Another Nay, here. Too much whitespace, too much work.

This isn’t just because Reuters is/was my homepage so I’m used to it, but I’m comparing it to all the other news sites I use….I’m finding it harder to use than a random news site I’ve never been to before.

Too much whitespace+extraneous dividers…someone too far up the ladder (or at least too in love with the word “clean”) is making too many UI decisions.

Posted by roymeo | Report as abusive

isit just me or is this new site VERY SLOW for me? i loved the old layout.. is there not a way to revert to the old style?

Posted by ash_0007 | Report as abusive

this sucks. fire the schmuck that promoted this.
get back to the comfy old layout, or i’m going to go to …. anything but this crap.
this sucks.
i can’t read it, it makes no damn sense for lay out.
this sucks.
just thot you’d like to know.
-O

Posted by dfowensby | Report as abusive

I am extremely disappointed in the new website. The update lacks the professionalism I have grown accustomed to at Reuters. I feel like it is a corporate knock off site that is trying to sell me the news not report it. If your goal was to sell me the news then please take my money and change the site back. This is a poor representation of the quality reporting Reuter’s is known for. PLEASE CHANGE THE SITE BACK!

Posted by freebee | Report as abusive

Hey morons I an get to your wp-admin page.
This is nothing more than a wordpress hack job, and a bad one at that. My 9 year old could have designed a better site. There was nothing wrong with the site as it was, why reinvent the wheel?

As for the positive comments in here, do you really think anyone is fooled into believing they are not being made by people affiliated with you? Show me one thing that this garbage offers over the old site.

C’mon!

Good bye Reuters (or is it…CNN?)

PATHETIC!

Posted by saddened1 | Report as abusive

Unless changed (back) to a more readable, faster and easier to scroll website with less white-space, I’m off to BBC World, France 24 News or one of the many other (RSS) sites with better design and layout.

As pointed out by others, why reinvent the wheel?!? The new Reuters web-design ‘sucks’ (apologies, but I feel that way)! Show your greatness and admit to this mistake .. and revert to the old design.

Posted by CeeBee | Report as abusive

Sorry, it doesn’t just suck. It’s a POS. Douchebags run it and douchebags designed it.

Posted by gwmc | Report as abusive

It’s really bad. I wouldn’t even register for the site, except that I felt so strongly the need to mention what a terrible blunder has been made. This is unreadable. I was truly enjoying the old site as well. As others have indicated, time to move on to another site. Vote with my eyes.

Posted by andrewlyman | Report as abusive

I must say I am also surprised by the radical change from the old format–and not in a good way. Whatever happened to tweaking or evolving over time an already successful site. It appears a sea change was not what this site really needed according to most of your former steady visitors commenting. It’s not a bad thing wanting to change… to be more current. Incorporating more technology, features and coverage is desirable but you don’t want to get rid of entirely what got you there in the first place. The best way to describe what was needed–change via continuity and progress, not blowing away your legacy. Very upset.

Posted by ontario | Report as abusive

A year in the making?? Schlesinger you’re an idiot! Horrible horrible design.

Posted by mike355f1 | Report as abusive

I liked the old appearance, but I’m willing to work with this for a while because beneath the appearance is the best news content that I’ve found anywhere. Frankly, that’s why I’m here.

I haven’t tried the new toolbar yet. I’m a bit leery of those. Perhaps, I’ll give it a go or maybe I can use Safari’s bookmarks to my advantage. I’ll likely figure out the best way for me to continue to get my new here.

However, I noticed that the Editor-in-Chief has an interest in what we’re saying, so I’m going to toss in my own narrow personal request.

During the day, I access Reuters just to quickly check what’s going on, not usually for more than five minutes at a time. FYI, during these times, I’m unlikely to click on an ad of any kind.

However, sometimes at night while playing online poker (when I’m more likely to click on an ad), I might be on Reuters for an hour or longer.

My problem? I play poker on a large screen Apple system and I don’t like to where my reading glasses. So I expand the poker screen large enough for me to use it comfortably, then open Reuters beside it so I can read the news in depth. It would be great if the article would “word wrap” to fit the vertical rectangle.

As it is now, the first couple paragraphs fit quite nicely; then the article widens. That forces me to drag that window wider which causes the two windows to overlap. Then each time I open a new article, I have to carefully center the text in the rectangle.

It’s not a calamity, of course. But it is repetitively inconvenient.

I access news here at least once daily, occasionally for hours at a time while playing online poker

Posted by breezinthru | Report as abusive

lol… One typo and a homonym brain fart. Getting older, sleeping less… maybe time to work on the insomnia problem? Thanks for considering my request, Chief, even if ever so briefly.

Posted by breezinthru | Report as abusive

This is awful!

The font is terrible, there is whitespace everywhere and what little content fits on my laptop screen without scrolling consists of adverts and a ridiculous mouseover navigation menu.

Where is the news ticker and where are the categories? I can’t get to a technology story without 1 mouseover and two clicks. Unless I scroll through the list of news headlines and try and pick out those related to technology.

I assume that the permanent login box at the bottom will pave the way for subscription content, but who is going to pay for this??

Posted by Geheee | Report as abusive

Sorry, but it is a little old and I do not think it meets the need of us who use Reuters for special purposes. Compared with WSJ and FT it gives an impression of few important news, and the structure is difficult to understand. Where do I sign in, something I want to do as a starter? Colors and white space is beautiful, but not very functional.
Anyway, Reuters has been great so far, hopefully will continue to be with some adjustments of the front page.

Posted by Almeberg | Report as abusive

my views is the previous looks better design and navigation. The new one looks very amateur..

Posted by flwong | Report as abusive

The previous page was so easy to use and this one isn’t. It looks so much like the BBC page and MSNBC and is so hard to find what you want. I am going to get my news from NY Times.com. You turned your page into an unuseable site with a lot of white space. Where’s the meat? It is really awful.

Posted by bob1946 | Report as abusive

I am an Internet and Usability Enthusiast from Bangalore, India.

Saw your new site.

In general its look good and conforms the new generation design.

Here are the drawbacks.
1. First of all the top navigation on a mouse over
pop is very frustrating. I am afraid to move the mouse
over, because I don’t know when the popup appears
and when it will disappear.

My suggestion is, instead of a mouse over, you
can invoke the navigation popup on a mouse click.
User can close the popup only on clicking on an X
button on the top right corner of the popup.

2. Only very less info (top news story) is showed above the fold. This is very disappointing. Large photograph took the key space. Users need to scroll down to view
the rest of the news.
My suggestion is to place most of the news stories link
on the right side. Squeeze in as much news links above
the fold.
3. The market news on a small column on the right side
does not look good.
My suggestion is to squeeze in the market news
as a horizontal row which includes the graph and tabs.

These are some of my initial findings.

Posted by noothan | Report as abusive

I think that this version of Reuters is terrible. One line listings of news items is a turn off. See the NY Times home page for a much more inviting format.

G. Seltzer

Posted by g11427 | Report as abusive

Ok 2nd day here on the new site. Was Reuters recently purchased by some conglomerate? The tone of the articles has changed some; If not that, then the navigation within the new sight is scary or perhaps scary simplistic. I can’t find an article that doesn’t sound like “end of the World” propaganda. What’s going on Reuters? I liked your news… :(

Posted by Preditor | Report as abusive

No, Mr. Schlesinger,

This site is not better, faster, and easier to handle. On the contrary. It is a turn-off. With 103 comments so far, it speaks volumes that 62 are negative, 19 positive and the rest kind of undecided.

You want to make this the world`s best website covering business and financial news, analysis and opinion. You have a very long way to go and you have stepped in the wrong direction. You are proud of your new home, you say. The pride is misplaced. You should feel embarrassed. Deeply!

Posted by yabroad | Report as abusive

I see where you and your team is trying to go with this new style and it’s important to give the site a new face lift. I’ve used Reuters as my default page for at least 6 years now, prior to that I used the New York Times as my default page and I now remember why I made Reuters my home page. I liked the functionality and quick way you could get to the many of the headlines. I also liked the way there were several brief headlines on the home page of whatever section you were interested in and the option of continuing.

I do like the design simplicity but some of those large images makes it sort of look like the Huffington Post’s awful home site, which is daunting to get around in sometimes. I love the market curtain effect! Market data can sometimes be too much to take in when it’s just all over a page. But going back to my opinion on the images; they just seem to take up too much space, that and the advertising on the very top of the front page has to go.

Altogether here my 2 final opinions:

1.)Smaller images, more quick glance stories with the ability to continue (maybe something similar to wath what NPR’s website is doing),

2.)Place the ads somewhere else. This is Reuters not some Angelfire website with ads everywhere. Reuters is for news, at least I hope it continues to be.

Other than that, I love the website, the colors are simple and so is the layout. You just need to re-emphasize on what Reuters is all about. NEWS.

Posted by CarlinoGroup | Report as abusive

New site is not as good as old one!
Even typeface choice poor!

Posted by cinelli123 | Report as abusive

I have to agree with most people commenting here, I don’t like the new site. There is less info on first glance. I used to be able to find what I wanted in one or two clicks, not I have trouble finding it at all. I liked the old site much better. If you want to change, then change to what the NY Times has (I don’t care for their content, but their website is easy to use). Reuters is number one in content, but this new website is not good at all.

Posted by terets | Report as abusive

I do not like the “improvement.” Another example of style over content and fixing something that “ain’t (or wasn’t) broke.” Your excellent content is drowning in a sea of distracting images.

Now it is difficult to sift through the headlines and soft spots. Reuters.com BEFORE was much easier to navigate and looked much more professional.

I hope this is just a misguided experiment and you will revert to the previous distinctive and more readable format.

Change simply for the sake of change is always unwise. You have not “chosen wisely.”

Posted by Murgatroyd | Report as abusive

Absolutely wonderful looking site! Great job – sure there are some minor functionality problems, but that is to be expected with a brand new site – most complaints are probably more a function of a resistance to change (a human norm), that to a truly objective view of the new site.

Posted by Ziad | Report as abusive

I want the old page back!

I particularly liked the fact that the articles used to have links to the next article at the bottom. I could flip through several articles very easily. Now I have to return to the section page, and click on the next article – back and forward, back and forward. I find that extremely frustrating.

I also liked the section links at the side. It was easy to move between sections, and find what I was looking for. Your new system is far less useful.

Posted by faolainnstorm | Report as abusive

The reason I have used Reuters for years as my homepage is the simplicity for basic information on the front page, with the possibility to dig deeper if I wanted. The new look reminds me of the other news pages I tried to get away from. Reuters’ homepage stood out – no longer so. I actually just signed up a reuters user account so I could leave this comment, in hopes it may help towards a change (back), along with all the other comments already posted.

Posted by WalkWith | Report as abusive

this is terrible. please go back to the reuters that i fell in love with. i cant even find the health section. im very upset with this change.

Posted by generic | Report as abusive

also, like others have stated, im going to have to find another source for my news. good job on driving me away from my favorite news source.

Posted by generic | Report as abusive

I have had Reuters as my homepage for a few years now. The old site was terrific. The new one, not so much. I don’t understand how anyone can think this version is an improvement. Afraid I’ll be looking for another central news source.

Posted by bostonmike | Report as abusive

HORRIBLE, LAME, DUMBED-DOWN, AMATEURISH, COMPLETELY UNUSABLE.

Too bad. I’ll be getting my financial news elsewhere from now on…lots of better sources to choose from.

Shlesinger, you’re a moron. Your arrogant and condescending dismissal of the majority of commenters here (now-former readers) is just what I’d expect from an Empty Suit.

Predicton: 18 months from now, Reuters will either be history…or trading in bankruptcy as a penny stock.

Posted by TravelPro | Report as abusive

The new site isn’t that bad but I agree that it needs some adjustments to become more functional. Focus on making the home page look more like a news site and less like an RSS reader and a lot of people will be grateful. It’s normal for users to pushback major layout changes, Reuters’ role is to listen and fix what doesn’t work incrementally while keeping the new good ideas of this design.

Posted by sylvain | Report as abusive

While I love change, this one is a dud. Went from a very useful format to something more like CNN, glitz and no punch. Too bad too, because you had something good and decided to reinvent the wheel.

Posted by onchor | Report as abusive

i have used reuters for my homepage for 6 years….i am changing it in the next few days because your new site is a pain in the butt to use…

Posted by captainpoultry | Report as abusive

I think the new look is an improvement. And at first I found it hard to navigate, but I think it was really because it was new to me. But after a couple of days, the navigation is easy and offers some great new features. I still think your content is great, so although there seem to be more comments that have a problem with the chances, I hope you keep most of the changes and just have to adjust a couple of things to make the masses happy.

Posted by HandBanana | Report as abusive

I’m not too happy with the site.

With the old site there were layers of news – the major story, then the important news by category together with the lesser headlines.

All of this was on one screen and a bit of scrolling.

Now I see the one major story, an in depth article and everything else combined together – it is very difficult to pick out the major stories. The stories by category are far down the screen and not so well listed.

“What’s going on?” Your website should help answer this question. If someone asks you that question, do you just blurt out a list of headlines or do you organize your response and talk about the major stories in some structured, coherent way?

Posted by Loon5 | Report as abusive

The redesign doesn’t bother me so much as the possibility that you will now begin covering celebrities and non-news. I love Reuters because it is the only websource of real business, science, and world news I could trust. I read other sites each day, and am used to obnoxious or frivolous webdesign, and this is but another in that jarring category. Just don’t lose the Reuters integrity, and I will learn to live with the redesign.

Posted by sunnieskye | Report as abusive

I’ve been a Reuters addict for years. Now the site is so ugly, the font either in blue (why??) or ridiculously tiny, that I’ve changed my homepage to the Times. Also, you now “can’t find” the username and password I’ve used all along.

All that white space, with huge photos mimicking CNN.com, I suppose to attract the ADD or the gossip-hungry, is a huge turn off.

Good grief, IF IT AIN’T BROKE, DON’T FIX IT!

Posted by UglyReuters | Report as abusive

Your new web page is a step backwards,why the chang? When what you had worked well.

Posted by SteveWC | Report as abusive

I don’t like the new site, at all! The old site gave me a quick summary of the latest headlines and other information and I was able to quickly follow-up on points of interest. The new site has things spread all over the place and it’s more difficult to use. I’m sorry to see that such a great site has been ruined in the name of change. I’ll be moving on to another site for my home page and news.

Posted by richm | Report as abusive

As a fond user of this information service, I am disappointed with the new change. While one should never adverse to potential improvements, this new style seems to be an example of change for change’s sake. The information is difficult to navigate, and classifications have more sub-levels than is needed.

There is an old motto that is appropriate here – ‘form should always follow function’. Your new design is an example of getting it the wrong way around.

Looking forward to a return to the previous design, or an improvement of the present one.

Congratulations on the excellent quality of the content!

Posted by GrandPoebah | Report as abusive

Is this a SURGE?
Come back home,the old sweet home

Posted by SteveP | Report as abusive

I am in favor of change that improves. I am not in favor of change for change’s sake. While the former was your intent, I think you fell well short. The new design makes it more difficult to find articles to read, seems almost disorganized to the point of distraction and is quite disappointing. Reuters was always a prime source of information for me, but will now have to look elsewhere for a useful web site.

Posted by Grinch | Report as abusive

For five years, I looked at Reuters for hours every day for quality news. While the news quality hasn’t changed (which is a good thing), the way I access the news is a process. I have to scroll through unrelated articles on the main page. To find the topic I want, I have to hover and click. Everything is not easily accessible like it was on the left side. If I scroll to the bottom, I have to go all the way back up to the top to choose another topic. The media is all the way at the bottom, promising more scrolling. I like when all the articles were listed neatly in rows, instead of the summary. The title tells me everything and the little summary means more scrolling. When I look at the front page, everything is all spread out in an unorganized and hard-to-read manner. Please go back to the old format, or just give us an option to look at the old site. Thank you.

Posted by MBennett624 | Report as abusive

Schlesinger blew it. Reuters looks like CNN now like they used the same web design consultants. Now its a resource hog & takes too much time to access important information. Reuters is not likely to do a U-turn, hoping to attract new readers & more ad revenue. So when competition eats your lunch, maybe then you’ll do some soul searching & reverse course.

Posted by MomsHugs | Report as abusive

I too must agree with everyone else. The new page is neither user friendly nor aesthetically pleasing. It really is a shame considering you were probably the leading contenders of online news. I’m sure in this weekend alone you lost several readers.

Posted by jillfoto | Report as abusive

I love Reuters news and brag to others about the information I find there. I hate to say it, but I like your old format much better. This new one does not seem to have a focus and I find it confusing. Please go back to the old way, not sure I will every like this one any better….G

Posted by misgloria | Report as abusive

i have been to this site three times today. not to read the news like i should be but to see how many people have a distaste for the new layout. seems like so far the masses arent liking it one bit. i know you spent a year on this and it would be a bitter pill to swallow to go back to the old way but i think you owe your loyal readers at least the option to view the old format. dont force us to find other news sources, you are risking too much with this. please consider it.

Posted by generic | Report as abusive

Long-time Reuters reader. I must join other commenters here and express my strong dislike for this new layout. I understand that Reuters likely feels the need to compete in a glitzier, more sensational marketplace. However, this change intimates to me that Reuters has finally succumbed to the lowest common denominator. Reuters has lost my patronage with this new development.

Posted by Eximious | Report as abusive

Your new site is a disaster.

Previously, it was easy to scan the headlines in all categories of news and browse among stories. And when I traveled (especially internationally), Reuters was usually my main source for news on the go.

But plainly you are now trying to convert yourselves into a business news site, making it harder to find non-business news stories. (For example, I’ve been touting your health news coverage for years now, to pretty much anyone who would listen, but now I wonder how much longer you will even continue to offer it, buried as it is in the new site.)

Unless you improve your format rather dramatically, I do not expect that I will be reading Reuters as frequently any more.

Posted by itzajob | Report as abusive

P.S. You could probably make everyone happy if you just provided a page somewhere that worked more or less like the old page, showing the top headlines for various areas of news.

Posted by itzajob | Report as abusive

Your new website is awful.
When scrolling it is jerky and difficult to
read. More difficult to find what you are looking
for due to its setup.

No improvement–Bring back the old site.

I’ve already switched to a different home page.

ddjtam

Posted by ddjtam | Report as abusive

I hate the new website, too.
- When I click on a link, I don’t want to save it, I want to go to it.
- I can’t adjust the size of the type.
- On the Contact Reuters page, it requires a topic entry, yet there’s no box for it. Clicking on the blue i circle brings up a search box, not a selection box.

One thing I liked about Reuters was the lack of clutter. Kiss that idea goodbye, and me with it.

Posted by pxwfile | Report as abusive

With enthusiasm I have pointed colleagues to your site. The news, the variety, the ease of navigation have always been welcoming. No longer. Please reconsider your decision and return to a page design that can be explained as simply as it is simple to navigate.

Posted by glyph | Report as abusive

Nice new web design you have there. But the S&P beta is still > 1, it’s 1.38, when it’s suposed to be 1. Why is that?

Posted by Papi | Report as abusive

I was very accustomed to other web page and I find this one a tad difficult to navigate. I will soldier on and find my way but just out of curiosity, why did you change it? I thought your other web page was easy to navigate and user friendly.

Posted by libertadormg | Report as abusive

Stuffy, cold and cooperate. Did Rupert Murdock take over because the site now has an elitist waspy feel as if it is trying to turn off anyone not on wall street. The amount of information available is as usual wonderful. Some of the new graphics are great, yet the well rounded character of the old Reuters I found more appealing. Perhaps meet half way. I have pushed Reuters.com on what has to be over a hundred people over the years but I fear you are going to make me look bad now. After all they are teachers, electricians, students, lawyers, bartenders, not just wired up stockbrokers or penny pinching portfolio desk jockys. This was my default page for nearly a decade now. Boo.

Posted by Cyrus_Roy | Report as abusive

Mr. Schlesinger,

Where did you get the model for Reuter’s new website? Obama’s Health Care Bill? The old site was better and was easier to navigate. What is this thing about saving an article? Why would anyone want to? Even then you can access it to read it. I love your generation. You just change things to inflict the comfortable. Now I feel less informed and more preoccupied with trying to understand where you are taking me on the website.

Posted by Noodle | Report as abusive

Clearly a misfire. You’ve transformed what was once an intuitive, easy-to-navigate news portal into another failed Web 2.0 experiment. I expect that I will not be alone when I abandon this ship.

Posted by jabaquara | Report as abusive

I can’t find anything I liked in your old format, e.g. early comment about Asian markets.
I’ll be voting with my feet.

Posted by biominvestor | Report as abusive

Why does the uk.reuters.com site get to keep the old format? I look at it and remember how good things used to be. There was a latest news ticker and many headlines at a glance. Now you have GIANT pictures and there’s all this scrolling to do to see whether there’s anything of note to read. Definitely more work. And what’s with these big pictures? Are you implying that “us disliterated Americans” don’t read anymore and must be entertained? I think you’ve got the wrong target audience. Go back to doing what you did best (and still do on the UK website).

Posted by vadai | Report as abusive

causes your home page get refresh every 300 seconds (5 minutes)
try to watch the slide show by yourself.
I am sure you will enjoy it.

Posted by Vincent9 | Report as abusive

the meta tag http-equiv=”refresh” content=”300;url=/home”
causes your home page get refresh every 300 seconds (5 minutes)
try to watch the slide show by yourself.
I am sure you will enjoy it.

Posted by Vincent9 | Report as abusive

your slideshow is suck!
no way to set the speed
no way to stop

Posted by Vincent9 | Report as abusive

You’ve lost me.
I tried the new site for a couple of days but it just keeps annoying me.
Call me when you’ve fired the CEO’s 5 year old son as a designer.

Posted by Can_Loup | Report as abusive

Having trouble navigating around and finding what I need. I cant find treasury bond market quotes, anywhere.

I miss the Market Update display that automatically followed the world markets from the old site. The old site news was nicely sub-divided into sections such as Tech, Business, Sports, etc; right on the home page. Not sure how the new sites home page headlines are organized, if they even are.

Perhaps with more use, I may become more use to the new design. Not putting it down, just different.

Posted by dxr | Report as abusive

Dear Mr. Schlesinger,

Thank you for the invitation to Reuters.

Sadly I have observed Reuters reporting etc with great disapointment.

You seem to screen your reporting subjects, and carefully edit all to the goal of apparently advancing your particular agenda. A sad indictment of your journalistic integrity.

I’ll try Reuters again, however with trepidation.

Cordially,
W. Lovely

Posted by arderder | Report as abusive

I would welcome the addition of a Good political Cartoonist. For instance, a picture of OBama receiving an Oscar along with the Nobel Peace Prize.

Posted by Limey1 | Report as abusive

I don’t mind changes; it fact; I welcome them with open arms. However, the new interface is completely different from the old interface. Moreover, it is completely unorganized and take much more time to find the information I need.

Posted by hk7eleven | Report as abusive

Today’s story:
“…By Allyn Fisher-Ilan and Nidal al-Mughrabi
JERUSALEM/GAZA (Reuters) – Sworn enemies Israel and Hamas…”
Is, in essence, wrong in the very first line. Here is why. Although Hamas may be considered a “sworn” enemy of Israel, Israel, for its part, is not an enemy of Hamas or any other Arab group. Israel just wants to survive and not be attacked, with missles, with suicide bombers or especially attacked through the media with lies and distortions.
The latest strategy is to attack anything Israeli or Jewish in the media with lies and distortions. To the editors: please keep vigilant in your reporting, for accuracy and truth. Thank you.

Posted by BaruchAtta | Report as abusive

As a Reuters photographer, I was desperately looking forward to this redesign and hoping it would provide a fresh new platform for us to showcase our work to the world in a visually compelling and user-friendly way.

And while it’s easy to be critical and resistant to change, I have to say I’m genuinely disappointed in the look and feel of the new site.

Superficially, I don’t know why the logo is red, but no matter that we look like the Economist.

But at least the Economist.com uses a strong image as the starting point. For our main image high on the page to be an advert is a grim intro.

Amid the essential, but essentially dry business news, the first image users see should be one of our most visually compelling or topical from the past 12-24 hours, shown large, as you would see on a newspaper web site such as the NYT.

The hierarchy of information presented generally appears backwards, with the most interesting stuff at the bottom of the page — strange considering the “inverted pyramid” approach normally used in the presentation of news wire information.

Obviously, financial news takes priority, but we could balance this out with something else, even thumbnail pix and Oddly Enough items, to provide some lighter content and broader appeal.

It would also help to have categories such as World News, U.S. News, Sport, Arts & Entertainment, etc, to broaden the business heavy content.

The slide-show presentations are a disaster. Impossible to look at or browse in any appealing way. They scroll too fast and are surrounded by distracting ads.
There should certainly also be an option to view all featured images full-screen without all the surrounding junk.

This will have to change if anyone, including me, is to ever bother looking at our images online.

I applaud the effort and thought that has already gone into creating this new look, but hopefully the necessary improvements will be made. I’d like reuters.com to be one of the first sites to look at each day, but I’ll hold off on adding it to my bookmarks for now.

Brgds, -Finbarr

Posted by finbarroreilly | Report as abusive

I find the new format to be far less convenient than the old one. With the previous format, it was possible to get all the main headlines in all the different categories on one page, making it possible to quickly and easily peruse all the major news. Now, it’s a major hassle to work through all the different categories. I am hoping to find another news site which is as convenient as Reuters used to be, otherwise I’ll just swap to CNN.com.

Posted by Danceswithforks | Report as abusive

I still haven’t heard why I was timed out when trying to post a comment a week ago or so , because it wasn’t complementery to obama . When I said he was great it took in a second . Today I posted and was told ok , but it may take hours to post . Who do you think yo’re kidding ? You are way over the top with this President , with a capital P , only because he’s the only one I have . For about 2.9 years more .

Feds
I’ll now delete Reuters from my home page

Posted by Feds | Report as abusive

[...] Reuters’ Editor-in-chief David Schlesinger has recently said about the new redesign that, “We want this to be the world’s best website covering business and finance news, analysis, and opinion. Full stop.” Source [...]

[...] pretty clear from the words of Reuters Editor-in-Chief David [...]

As a post script to my December 5th comments, I’m now using the RSS feed from Reuter’s UK (World) site, where they still use the ‘old’ web-design:

http://mf.feeds.reuters.com/reuters/UKWo rldNews

I find this more to my liking. And loading is swifter too!

Regards, CeeBee

Posted by CeeBee | Report as abusive

Now what? As a ‘pps’ to my February 2nd remarks, it seems the UK site has changed to the new web layout too. From my perspective, you don’t really get it, do you? The text is less compact (too much white space up/down/left/right), resulting in extra scrolling and, indeed, slower loading, etc. The same negative arguments as raised against the US version. Now what? Too bad, as I really like your news feed but NOT the new layout. I’m off…

Best, CeeBee

Posted by Cee-Bee | Report as abusive

Request #2844 Reuters Online Editorial Policy for Revisions to Already Published Articles
Rbarber17
Feb-28 14:02

Please respond to my comments made about the following Reuters article on 28-Feb-2011 at 11:00 am EST:

http://www.reuters.com/article/comments/ idUSTRE71Q1W920110227

How is it possible for the time stamps of bloggers to be earlier than the time and date of the article, unless of course the author goes in and “tweaks” it, not realizing that by doing so, he is changing the time stamp, too.

Regards,
barberrr

=============================

CommentsVictor Jeffrey Serote

Thomson ReutersDear Rbarber17,

Thank you for contacting Reuters.com support. Please be informed that your feedback has been escalated to the Editorial team for review.

Kind regards,

The Reuters.com Team

=============================

Mar-01 2011 10:45 Rbarber17

Quite a lengthy wait for your Editorial team’s response. When can I expect to hear back from them? Is it possible Reuters has no existing policies for the issues raised in my Blog comments?

=============================

Mar-04 2011 11:50 Rbarber17

What is the normal time to respond to a request?

=============================

Mar-07 2011 12:47 Victor Jeffrey Serote

Thomson ReutersDear Rbarber17,

Apologies for the delay in responding to you. The Editorial team is currently reviewing the case. If indeed a bug, this will undergo a replication cycle so it will show correctly in the site.

Again, we are sorry for the inconvenience that this caused you.

Regards,
The Reuters.com Team

=============================

Mar-07 2011 13:26 Rbarber17

28-Feb-2011 Request submitted
01-Mar-2011 Request “escalated to the Editorial team for review”
02-Mar-2011 No response received
03-Mar-2011 No response received
04-Mar-2011 No response received
05-Mar-2011 No response received
06-Mar-2011 No response received
07-Mar-2011 Editorial team “currently reviewing the case”
08-Mar-2011 No response received
09-Mar-2011 No response received
10-Mar-2011 No response received
11-Mar-2011 No response received

How long does it take to answer a simple question? Has Reuters got somehting to hide?

Posted by barberrr | Report as abusive

I kept trying to post a comment on a story. After hitting post comment, nothing shows up. And no error or confirmation given.

I would reload the page to see if my comment appeared. Nothing. I posted again. Nothing.

There needs to be some sort of confirmation for a post or people are going to post over and over hoping one “sticks” like I just did. I’m going to wait a half an hour and see if any of them appear.

Posted by Stonepuppy | Report as abusive