Yesterday I wrote about how headline writers can influence the perception of news.
At first, the front page of the Seattle Times website reported on new crime statistics with the alarmist headline, “Seattle sees sharp increase in crime.” Later, they walked the headline back to the less provocative and more accurate, “Seattle sees increase in crime after two record-low years.”
Meanwhile, both headlines linked to the same article with the same confusingly written headline: “Sharp increase in Seattle robberies, assaults; murders, rapes down.” (I’m betting I’m not the only one who initially missed the semicolon.)
But after stumbling across a print edition of the Times (it was being used as a coaster in a bar), I’m not sure what all the online indecision and confusion was about:
I dunno… looks to me that the headline in the print edition got it just about right. Why couldn’t the online edition just go with that?
It never occurred to me before, but are different editors writing the headlines for the online edition than the print edition, and if so, what could possibly account for translating “up slightly” into “sharp increase” other than a desire to use hyperbole to trick readers into clicking through?
If online really is the future of news, it doesn’t bode well that the Times apparently holds its online edition to a lower standard than its print.
Years back, (I’m cribbing from Bruce) the Tacoma paper wrote a headline about a dramatic uptick in car thefts and assaults over a one month period which drew a sharp rebuke from Tacoma’s chef of Police. It seems the uptick in assaults was largely the result of one kid getting repeatedly beat-up, by the same group of kids. Every time he got beat up he’d call the cops, but then refuse to cooperate with them.
When you only have a handful of assaults a month one person getting jumped three or four times looks like a big % increase.
The uptick in car thefts was caused by two teens who in one or two nights stole several cars. The teens were eventually caught.
The moral of the story is: crime stats alone don’t tell the whole story. Well that, and legacy media are lazy.
Just think of all the work they could have saved if the online addition had written the headline correctly the first time.
I learned in journalism history class that “crime waves” have always coincided with slow news in other departments.
The answer to your question Goldy is yes. Different editors. The print edition gets the much more experienced editors an certainly more thoughtful and thourough treatment. Doesn’t make it right, tho.
Today’s newsfail: the P-I story about the break-in at the Seattle Mac Store. The article didn’t say if anything was actually stolen. News? What is news?
And what gives with the Times’ list of “articles that I might be interested in” at the end of their articles? They’re either way too old, or totally unrelated to the article I just read.
They’re pretty numbskull in their online edition – the PI has always been much more web-savvy. With any luck, their print edition will die, and then they’ll lose roundly in the online battle.