I much prefer Whitney aesthetically and for the reasons you describe.  The website should be, and is, a distinct entity aside from the magazine; part of your dilemma involves the inclusion of the word ‘magazine’ in this part of the site, which makes you feel bound in a way you wouldn’t if it was a standalone presence.  I say fight the logo!  People know it’s New Internationalist because they can read the words in the logo, not because it’s set in Bodega.

Is there a compromise?

Bodega Sans Black for the title and Whitney SemiBold Condensed for the ‘magazine’ text?

sorry Andy, having tried to persuade them unsuccessfully, I think you have to go with the client. I also think that there is a continuity of branding across websites and other material. Go with it and move on. atb,j.

I agree with you - Bodega is mcuh too shouty, and looks too imposing on white compated to Whitney (curiously I don’t mind the reversed out Bodega white on black - yes I have issues).

I agree that Whitney is much nicer, but I think you’re going to find it hard to convince them to change it.  It is basically their logo, and unless they are happy for you to change their logo (in print as well), I think you’re going to have to use their typeface. 

It sucks, as I really think you’ve chosen a beautiful font. 

I struggled with this a lot—designing a website around a logo I hated, I ignored the logo, and then the branding looked disjointed.  As Paul Arden says in “It’s not how good you are, It’s how good you want to be”, “Compose your [ad] from the weakest point…”.  If the brief was not to change the logo, you’d be forcing them to redo their print work as well.

I prefer the Whitney but I don’t think the old font looks that bad either. With that in mind i’d stick with the old one, but usually if I was against the current font so much i’d really be pushing to change it too.

The best you can do is provide the arguement for your choice and if they still go with it then you may just have to accept defeat.

Bodega Sans Black does indeed look out of place, but I think that’s more due to what’s surrounding it rather than it being rendered on screen.  In your design, you’ve got a generous amount of white space around, and a fairly light and airy feel to the page, with some big black text in the header that unbalances that.

As for the quirky letterforms, particularly the gaps produced by the ‘e’ and ‘a’, the magazine has much tighter kerning that reduces these gaps (as can be seen on http://www.the-coming-war.com/Magazines/New_Internationalist.jpg)

I think using Bodega Sans Medium with slightly tighter kerning might work better than the current Black version, while still retaining the ‘brand identity’

Whitney definitely is a better fit for ‘magazine’ in the header, and doesn’t draw undue attention to itself; Bodega seems just a little too quirky there.

Whitney SemiBold Condensed is certainly the better looking in my opinion.

@Prydie

Whitney is certainly nicer but the Bodega isn’t “that” bad. I’ve seen, and had to work with much, much worse!

You don’t really have an option other than perhaps to use Whitney for the “magazine” bit.

Is there a slightly ligher weight of Bodega or could you artificially thin it down a bit? I think the weight is the problem more than the admittedly quirky letterforms.

I definitely prefer Whitney SemiBold, apart from being less aggressive it’s much more contemporary. I guess it’s the typography version of blasphemy to mix the two? i.e. keep it for the words ‘New Internationalist’ and replace for all other sub-headings. My experience is that I’ve worked in roles where I’ve had to create adverts for companies and due to super quick turn around times didn’t usually have the option to borrow their in-house font. I’d usually find something that complemented the company style. However, if that’s not going to fly here, I’m inclined to agree with you on the font choice.

In bold I think Bodega looks good, but ‘magazine’ does look cramped and awkward. It somehow doesn’t even sit well with the nav. Without a doubt the Whitney reads better, and in my opinion better suits the style and content of the site. ‘New Internationalist’ at a relatively bigger size (without ‘magazine’) makes more sense e.g. the magazine cover. I don’t think continuity between print and web is as important as using meeting web users’ expectations of a fresh, relevant design. Ultimately the mag wants to maximise their online readership, so the more attractive the better. I feel your pain though - it is their ‘logo’ after all.

Bodega Sans Black is certainly easier to read on screen and fits better with a more elegant, minimalist design. Looking at the current New Internationalist site the current typeface seems to work better in white against a bold colour rather than against white.

Any compelling reason to include the ‘magazine’ part? The site should stand on its own and support the magazine, not just be a copy of what they print (IMHO).

Andy, nice to read what the voices in your head are arguing about :)
Though I can see what you and everyone else is saying about the clarity and legibility of Whitney - I don’t quite agree that Bodega looks wrong on screen. I personally really like how you are showing it within the new menu.
It is quite distinctive and and has character, giving it a clear identity. And it’s not about whether or not the typeface/logo should be same for print and web - for me, it’s more about the distinct look which Bodega gives the site heading. The strong bold name followed by the light red word ‘magazine’ looks beautiful - the quirky letter shapes simply work, for me anyway. I’d feel it would be a shame to abandon this lovely type face…
(I won’t go into details here, like how gorgeous the ‘g’ and the ‘z’ look in “magazine” or the rest… I’d write you novel otherwise)
well, just my thoughts ;)

I think Whitney is good, but Leona SemiBold Condensed is much more modern.

I prefer Whitney as well. But like you said, or one of your personalites, it’s going to come down to marketing and branding.

You’ve also turned American judging by your spelling!

I think you should keep the bodega as it is their logo and consistency is better than legibility in this case, after all, it’s only the logo and not titles on the page. A logo is recognize as much by it’s shape as it is by what is written, so to change the typeface only on the web would undermine the brand more than the little nuisance or a couple of letters that seem off.

I do think the “magazine” part is too light, I don’t know if it’s in their logo already but if not, I would use a bolder face for that part.

Not considering the actual branding, I think that although your version is more legible, I still prefer the Bodega as it has more “character” and help separate the logo from the body text.

*very* nice…. Bodega Medium looks perfect — and might just be the one to stop the argument in your head.
I still prefer Bodega for ‘magazine’ as well - though it is very light. It’s the “e” and the dots on the “i” which don’t quite gel for me when both fonts are combined.

I don’t think shifting Bodega from Black to Medium requires client approval (ie, it’s not materially different), and I think you’ve got free rein on ‘magazine’.

That’s looking good.

The medium definitely looks better but could use some tightening up - couldn’t we all?

Does that mean I win something? :)

PS. General Limpopo is still asking about your MBP

The newer version looks a bit stretched, vertically, which emphasizes the smallness of the spaces between the letters.

It’s their word mark, you have to stick with it.  If it doesn’t look right in the design… dare I suggest it’s a problem with the design not the word mark?

The Bodega isn’t as readable but you’re not going to have to read very much of it and the quirkiness of it makes it very recognizable, I wouldn’t take that away from it lightly, it is part of the brand identity. I think your design balances the aggressiveness of the font you’re worried about.

I also like the Bodega Sans Medium as a quirky but lighter compromise and think the difference between web and print can be used to justify that small departure… we use the same argument to use the condensed version of our corporate font on our website.

As for uniting the voices… I have some black kryptonite and a laser beam we could try.

I think your updated example, with the medium weight, is just about perfect.  Satisfies both sides of the mental debate.