Yesterday The New York Times Company announced plans to rename its 125-year-old Paris-based paper The International Herald Tribune as…you guessed it, The International New York Times.
We understand this move: While the Tribune is a well-established name in international journalism, the Times brand is more valuable than ever in an era of shrinking revenue–and its executives are eager to expand its influence by tying its various properties together under the general NYT banner.
Still, something about this new name bugs us. It doesn’t quite roll off the tongue, and readers will understandably be confused about the differences (if any) between the publications. The New York Times already boasts some of the world’s best international journalism, so why even make the distinction?
Maybe this “new” merger just needs a catchy, less clunky nickname. Any bright ideas?
- Gawker Clarifies on Tweets by Writers
- The Ticker: Ebola Update; GM Lawyer to Resign; Reebok Seeks Refresh; And More
- Reuters Has Some Ebola Crisis Advice for Burson-Marsteller
- What Would Bill Do? Media Coach Bill McGowan Takes on the Week's News