In life, we count on some things to be steady and unwavering, resisting the winds of change. The Rolling Stones. Varsity chili dogs. Jesse Helms.

And The New York Times.

This fall, the Times gave in to change. It switched to a new typeface. Until October, the newspaper had used a variety of fonts in its headlines: Bookman, Century, Latin Extra Condensed and others. But now, it’s all Cheltenham, all the time.

People can get pretty shaken up when one of their old standbys gets even a minor makeover. So not surprisingly, some people reacted to the font change as though someone had replaced Mick Jagger with Clay Aiken.

But others had more insightful perspectives on the change. One was Christopher Hawthorne, who writes about design at the Times. In a piece published by Slate, Hawthorne said the new Cheltenham typeface “seems too carefree and lightweight to introduce a story about sniper victims or dead American soldiers.”

How important is a typeface to the personality and credibility of a publication? Read Hawthorne’s full article to find out. You’ll also get Hawthorne’s insight into the change at the Times, what it says about the paper’s future direction, and how people have reacted to this minor cosmetic upheaval.