| ▲ | tolerance 20 hours ago |
| This was a terrific, reasonable take on this “controversy”. I have to admit that the correspondence set in Calibri looks like something dispatched from a leasing office. Imagine reading the Warren Commission report set in that. The author seems to settle on the consensus that surrounded TNR before this exchange made the news. It’s banal. At times it signals to its original objectives (e.g., Prof. Dr. style websites [1]). But still banal more often than not. I love Univers. But I don’t think there’s anyone in public office with enough influence and swagger to ever enforce it. At the same time I have a bad feeling about the attention that decisions like this draw and what it may lead to. The article does a great job at portraying the general incompetence in both parties. I can imagine Beto O’Rourke somewhere dreaming about styling all government communiqués like a page out of Ray Gun. Planning his come back. To set anything issued from Ted Cruz’s office in Zapf Dingbats. War. [1]: https://contemporary-home-computing.org/prof-dr-style/ |
|
| ▲ | jamesliudotcc 20 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| The Warren Commission report was set in Century Schoolbook, the Supreme Court's typeface of choice. The appendices are photo reproductions of originals produced on typewriters, so they are in something monospaced. You can see for yourself. They certainly would not have used Times New Roman. But I suppose interoffice memoranda are meant to be skimmed, not read, so TNR or Calibri are both fine. |
| |
| ▲ | tolerance 19 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I didn’t mean to suggest that they would’ve. I just named a government document with significant gravity behind it to affect a point similar to the author’s: > There’s nothing inherently wrong with this style, but one would hardly want an official document or legal contract to appear “warm and soft.” Consider the response I gave to the other child comment on this thread referring to a different document as a revision if that suits you. [1] I’m sorry. I don’t know of nor do I have the wherewithal to find any correspondence from the State Department to bolster my argument that “humanist fonts” are not always suited to the tenor of all government correspondence. Oddly, none of the press releases on state.gov are available in PDF as far as I can tell. Wait. At least imagine this! > The State Department is taking decisive action against five individuals who have led organized efforts to coerce American platforms to censor, demonetize, and suppress American viewpoints they oppose. These radical activists and weaponized NGOs have advanced censorship crackdowns by foreign states—in each case targeting American speakers and American companies. As such, I have determined that their entry, presence, or activities in the United States have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States. <https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/20...> In “Carlito”! It’s already in “Open Sans”, which looks thinner and may have a taller X-height. What do you think of it? Not quite “warm”; certainly “soft”, I think. Should I feel concerned about this news? Or just alright? Anodyne. That’s the way the words start to look after some time when set like this. How far away is that feeling from “banal”? [1]: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/SAP-SJ... | |
| ▲ | Aloisius 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | If the US wants a truly "traditional" typeface, the choice would be Caslon. Caslon was used to print the first 200 copies of the Declaration of Independence. Old Caslon was used for Thomas Paine's Common Sense. It was also a favorite of printers throughout the US including Benjamin Franklin. |
|
|
| ▲ | tombert 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I also never really liked Calibri for professional stuff. Maybe I'm just a victim of conditionig, but Calibri always had a bit of a "web page" vibe, not official document vibe. I personally think that Computer Modern/Latin Modern from LaTeX looks a lot better than Times New Roman. I wish they'd standardize on that but it might not be included in Microsoft Office, so I guess Times New Roman it is. |
|
| ▲ | WillAdams 19 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I love Univers as well, but the _Q_ is just _too_ weird by most folks perceptions. |
| |
|
| ▲ | moron4hire 19 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I'm sorry, you can't argue the font choice signals banality in the same article in which you argue that readers aren't sophisticated enough on font choice to catch that serifs are supposed to signal professionalism. |
| |
| ▲ | tolerance 18 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Why not? One quality is inherent, the other inherited. The typeface was developed with banality in mind and presumably become popular because of its utility in this respect. The ensuing popularity in word processors and on the Web likely lead to the idea that it’s more professional than others. Again, the author: > Indeed, the stronger explanation for Times New Roman’s long reign isn’t aesthetic excellence, but practicality and inertia. | | |
| ▲ | f30e3dfed1c9 18 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | "The typeface was developed with banality in mind..." That's completely wrong. Times New Roman was designed for legibility at small sizes, in narrow columns, on absorbent newsprint, printed at high speed. That is, it was designed explicitly for a very specific purpose, which it fills admirably. None of that should be taken as any kind of comment on the current brouhaha. | | |
| ▲ | tolerance 17 hours ago | parent [-] | | I hate for us to have to make it clear that any claim in favor of the typeface’s suitability should not be interpreted as direct support for those responsible for re-instituting it. This isn’t an admonishment, but a lament I hope you may share. While TNR wasn’t designed to evoke banality in its less desirable connotations I do think the way that you’re describing it match sensibilities that the word “banal” can also carry; Ordinary, commonplace. I admit—it’s a stretch I’m taking. But how far from banal is the utilitarian? |
| |
| ▲ | moron4hire 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Because font choice outside of large strokes like fantasy fonts is meaningless. All of this exposition only works if people are literate in typography enough to get it. Most people can't even understand literalist art, say nothing about the symbolism of typography. It's like how the Victorians invented a whole meaning categorization to different species of flowers and then acted like it was universal law. It's a secret in-crowd code. It has no inherent meaning. | | |
| ▲ | tolerance 15 hours ago | parent [-] | | Could you clarify what you mean by “meaningless”? How you can conceive a literate society that is not affected by type. The fact that general literacy is apparently declining is beside the point but we remain surrounded by letters and words, the shape of which determine how we comprehend what they point out. Planes, signs, screens depend on font choice to be effective. Newspapers and memoranda too. The degrees may vary but the significance of a font choice just can’t be as simple as you make it seem. Just only to the extent of the value the public ascribes to the type-bearing object. Granted, we may be assigning too much to US State Department documents. But who’s to say? |
|
| |
| ▲ | xiphmont 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | He can, he did, and we're all here arguing about it, which somehow delights me. |
|
|
| ▲ | dheera 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > correspondence set in Calibri looks like something dispatched from a leasing office In general this is the way I feel about anything written in a Microsoft-, Apple-, or Ubuntu-supplied typeface. If you stick to system fonts you the pinnacle of embodiment of apathy in my book. Have some backbone, browse through Google fonts, pick something that represents your organization and stick with it. Even if you are a leasing office, pick a good font. That will make me more likely to lease from you because your attention to typography conveys to me that you will also be attentive to details in building maintainence. If you communicate in Times New Roman and Arial it tells me that you probably are apathetic about mold in the walls and electrical code as well. |
| |
| ▲ | necovek 14 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | While I appreciate nice typography like not many do (I decide on what editions of a book — especially classics — to get based on the typography and overall layout), I also appreciate that I may be easily swayed by good typography and land on a crappy outcome (I have several very lousy books that were done really well typographically :)). So I'd never use that as a metric: yes, I care about typography, and if the content of the message is equivalent, I'll pick the one done better. But I do not expect everyone else to put as much weight on it. | |
| ▲ | ericjmorey 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If it's legible, the terms of a lease are way more important than the typeface. Anyone wasting time on the typeface of the contract would worry me more than comfort me with regard to knowing what's important. | |
| ▲ | QuercusMax 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | That's... certainly an opinion. | |
| ▲ | tiffanyh 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Any typefaces you’d recommend? | | |
| ▲ | dheera 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | For serious government communications? Libertinus Serif, Vollkorn, Ibarra Real Nova, Baskerville, Libre Baskerville |
|
|
|
| ▲ | unethical_ban 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Not sure why Beto is catching strays, but I can tell you're from Texas, heh. |
|
| ▲ | wavefunction 20 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I suppose the administration's typo-ridden nonsense formatted with a serif-font MIGHT appear more professional. It's certainly possible, not impossible. |
| |
| ▲ | tolerance 20 hours ago | parent [-] | | Right. Now imagine something like this: > In response, based upon the cumulative effects of these hostile acts against the citizens and interests of the United States and friendly foreign nations, the President recognized that the United States is in a non-international armed conflict with these designated terrorist organizations. The President directed the Department of War to conduct operations against them pursuant to the law of armed conflict. The United States has now reached a critical point where we must use force in self-defense and defense of others against the ongoing attacks by these designated terrorist organizations. <https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/SAP-SJ...> In “Carlito”! <https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Carlito> |
|
