Headlines Terrify Me
Crafting an effective headline is an art form mastered only by the finest journalists and editors. In fewer words than a tweet, all nuances and "yes, buts" must be simplified. This is crucial because journalists are taught to always consider: "if someone only reads the headline, will they be somewhat informed?"
A headline can determine whether a news piece flops or becomes widely read. In an era dominated by social media and push notifications, a headline must be as enticing as a piece of chocolate, making you crave more. I deliberately avoid the term "clickbait" because the goal is not to mislead by 1) withholding information or 2) promising what cannot be delivered.
However, my fear of headlines stems from a different reason. They scare me because they are often the only thing people read. Moreover, condensing a 6000-character news piece into a brief headline opens the door to much misinterpretation and error.
These reflections were prompted by reading this post about two problematic headlines published this week. I won't delve into details, as "The Editor's Desk" covers it excellently and echoes my sentiments. However, I wanted to share my perspective.
Being a journalist means living with the constant certainty that one day you will err. Often, these mistakes are harmless (once, I wrote "Tim Cock" instead of "Tim Cook" 🫠). But whenever my work makes it to the front page, I question myself repeatedly, worried that I might have inadvertently sabotaged myself with my words.
Believe it or not, after nearly a decade as a journalist, the anxiety preceding a publication can still induce nausea.
This isn't a blog post seeking forgiveness on behalf of the news industry (we've been undermining ourselves for some time). But before you rush to the comments section to berate the "turd with two eyes" who penned that piece, consider that the same journalist might be in the bathroom, sick with anxiety, throwing up because of a mistake.