Might sound like a joke at first but font choice is serious business. After all, there are half a million people in the U.S. Army alone - ensuring that military orders are read accurately and...
Interesting points deriding Courier New - admittedly, I always thought that it was impractical as far as spacing was concerned, but the typewriter-esque font evokes that olden day feel which lends another layer of authenticity. After reading the article, I went back and looked up President Eisenhower's famous D-Day letter. Turns out it's written in Times New Roman!
Ah, don't get me wrong. I understand typefaces matter. I'm absolutely on board with that part. Why I thought it might be satire is that almost all military stuff sounds like it might be satire....
Ah, don't get me wrong. I understand typefaces matter. I'm absolutely on board with that part. Why I thought it might be satire is that almost all military stuff sounds like it might be satire. Their mode of speech is so strange. Especially so with the American military.
It's very hard to take sentences like "to build a more lethal force, the Marine Corps needs a font for the 21st century" entirely seriously. Fonts are important, that part I absolutely get - but it's hard to imagine someone seriously suggesting that "being more lethal" is an actual goal. Being more effective, sure. Being better at resolving conflicts in the most humane and safest way possible, absolutely. But just openly saying they need Times New Roman in order to slaughter more people?
See? If you wrote it as satire it would read almost the same.
It's just the banality of evil at work. What you're seeing there is corporate middle management buzzword crap coming from a company that produces corpses and has a mission statement to match.
It's just the banality of evil at work. What you're seeing there is corporate middle management buzzword crap coming from a company that produces corpses and has a mission statement to match.
It's not, Task and Purpose is a well-known online publication within the military community. They do write some more satirical stuff occasionally though: see this article that examines Game of...
If you want pure military satire, Duffleblog is among the gold standard. They discuss a lot of niche scenarios that might not seem that humorous, but usually hit hard to anyone in the service. See this article that was written after cocaine was found at the White House this month: White House urinalysis NCO waiting his whole life for this opportunity
Oh, for goodness sake. There is no "perfect" font for every use case. Most of the fonts mentioned were originally intended for the optimum contrast and lighting inherent with carbon black ink text...
Oh, for goodness sake. There is no "perfect" font for every use case. Most of the fonts mentioned were originally intended for the optimum contrast and lighting inherent with carbon black ink text on (nearly) white paper.
Having survived everything from amber on black TTY screens to murky e-paper to Retina displays at 300 dpi to the sharpest, highest-contrast current OLED TVs/gaming monitors, it's still difficult to find a font that works for everyone, every task, everywhere, all the time.
There's not much public data on human factors/UI design for a "most readable" font, either. Maybe the Marines need to talk with the Air Force for whatever aviation standards can offer?
I don't think they're looking for a perfect typeface for all situations, just one which improves on their current choice for documents. I'm sure they have their own typeface for painting names on...
I don't think they're looking for a perfect typeface for all situations, just one which improves on their current choice for documents. I'm sure they have their own typeface for painting names on boats and other war stuff.
There's not much public data on human factors/UI design for a "most readable" font, either.
There is quite a lot. Plenty of books on type design. It's far from an un-studied field. Also there has been a lot of hours in UI labs figuring out this kind of thing and reports are available for a price, either past or commissioned for the exact use case required. I would assume/hope that a large government department isn't operating entirely on guesswork.
I did think it was funny that an article written in 2023 about future design choices seemed to be struggling to decide on Times New Roman, a decision which would have sounded outdated in 1995, let alone nearly thirty years later. I know big public institutions often move slowly but seriously?
Might sound like a joke at first but font choice is serious business. After all, there are half a million people in the U.S. Army alone - ensuring that military orders are read accurately and efficiently is necessary to facilitate communication across the chain of command. (Also factor in the point that the military isn't famous for its learned population, and the need for simple effective communication grows even further.)
Interesting points deriding Courier New - admittedly, I always thought that it was impractical as far as spacing was concerned, but the typewriter-esque font evokes that olden day feel which lends another layer of authenticity. After reading the article, I went back and looked up President Eisenhower's famous D-Day letter. Turns out it's written in Times New Roman!
If you want any proof that font choice is worth debating, the Washington Post wrote another article that @Aestivation shared on Tildes: What’s your type? Try these tests to pick the perfect font for you.
Ah, don't get me wrong. I understand typefaces matter. I'm absolutely on board with that part. Why I thought it might be satire is that almost all military stuff sounds like it might be satire. Their mode of speech is so strange. Especially so with the American military.
It's very hard to take sentences like "to build a more lethal force, the Marine Corps needs a font for the 21st century" entirely seriously. Fonts are important, that part I absolutely get - but it's hard to imagine someone seriously suggesting that "being more lethal" is an actual goal. Being more effective, sure. Being better at resolving conflicts in the most humane and safest way possible, absolutely. But just openly saying they need Times New Roman in order to slaughter more people?
See? If you wrote it as satire it would read almost the same.
It's just the banality of evil at work. What you're seeing there is corporate middle management buzzword crap coming from a company that produces corpses and has a mission statement to match.
I'm pretty sure this isn't satire but it could be.
Either way it's an interesting read. Type matters.
It's not, Task and Purpose is a well-known online publication within the military community. They do write some more satirical stuff occasionally though: see this article that examines Game of Thrones through the lens of modern military doctrine.
If you want pure military satire, Duffleblog is among the gold standard. They discuss a lot of niche scenarios that might not seem that humorous, but usually hit hard to anyone in the service. See this article that was written after cocaine was found at the White House this month: White House urinalysis NCO waiting his whole life for this opportunity
Oh, for goodness sake. There is no "perfect" font for every use case. Most of the fonts mentioned were originally intended for the optimum contrast and lighting inherent with carbon black ink text on (nearly) white paper.
Having survived everything from amber on black TTY screens to murky e-paper to Retina displays at 300 dpi to the sharpest, highest-contrast current OLED TVs/gaming monitors, it's still difficult to find a font that works for everyone, every task, everywhere, all the time.
There's not much public data on human factors/UI design for a "most readable" font, either. Maybe the Marines need to talk with the Air Force for whatever aviation standards can offer?
I don't think they're looking for a perfect typeface for all situations, just one which improves on their current choice for documents. I'm sure they have their own typeface for painting names on boats and other war stuff.
There is quite a lot. Plenty of books on type design. It's far from an un-studied field. Also there has been a lot of hours in UI labs figuring out this kind of thing and reports are available for a price, either past or commissioned for the exact use case required. I would assume/hope that a large government department isn't operating entirely on guesswork.
I did think it was funny that an article written in 2023 about future design choices seemed to be struggling to decide on Times New Roman, a decision which would have sounded outdated in 1995, let alone nearly thirty years later. I know big public institutions often move slowly but seriously?