Scientific American's (SciAm) new design - what do you think?

Well, it seems the new editor is making her mark and I have to say that I like it. I hope it foreshadows a new direction for the magazine.

It has generally been recognized round these parts (SDMB) that SciAm isn’t what it used to be. There is substantial doubt about the quality and objectivity of it’s articles and even the choice of material with some allegations that it has been pandering to a more general audience.

I suppose I agree with most of those criticisms to one degree or another, but I have high hopes for the magazine’s Renaissance.

In the November issue, there are 6 main articles. Two are by academic researchers, one is an interview with a famous physicist. Three are by what seem to be very well regarded science writers. The presentation is notable with the first 2 articles being presented first, then the interview and then the remainder.

There still might be some vestigial preachiness and that will bear further observation, but I’m feeling hopeful.

Seems like rotating the wheels to me.

I like the older issues; they challenged you. And the two-color illustrations were more than adequate. I’ve read it now for 37 years; the last 15 not-so-much, the editorial content is just seems more flashy. Is it more political? Yeah, but you have the rise of the anti-science, anti-intellectual crowd who seemed to be determined to drive the political square peg into the scientific round hole.

But if they want to really impress me: bring back The Amateur Scientist!