Headlines and taglines and things that go bump

Display type and editors' notes are meant to stick out

View this email online If you think of the news story as a primary course, the headlines and the taglines are the accoutrements, stuff that is added to enhance the main offering. As many chefs and decorators will tell you, the trimmings are sometimes the details that pull a meal or a room together.  Headlines have grown in significance in the creation and delivery of news. Words that might seem flippant or irreverent to people who don’t spend hours on the internet are often the perfectly formulated invitation into a story.  While not quite as prominent, taglines — those notes at the end of the story — are also critical when a story might change. If you walk away from a story knowing that it is incomplete and might change, you’ll keep that in mind as you take in additional information. We’ve got a question about headlines, a question about taglines and a third question about the phrase “third world.” Digging into each of these is a window into just a handful of the many small decisions that happen in a news story on its journey to the consumer. Every one of those decisions is important. Done well, they make the story better. A slight miss becomes a slight distraction. And big mistakes become major flaws in the product, although we didn’t find major flaws while answering your questions this week.   "At Supreme Court, Mean Girls Meet 1st Amendment" read an NPR headline. Erin Schaff/Supreme Court/AP From the Inbox Here are a few quotes from the Public Editor's inbox that resonated with us. You can share your questions and concerns with us through the NPR Contact page. You read the headline and then clicked on the story, right? Gretchen Dale writes: “Mean girls” and “Big Government”? Dear NPR, have you hired Fox News to write your headlines? In the past few days I have seen many headlines that are both misleading and buy into untrue stereotypes. What’s going on with my favorite unbiased news channel?   Elizabeth Cadorette writes: The President never used the phrase "big government is back" in his speech, so why was this the headline chosen? This seems a demonstration of a bias that is not supposed to exist, and irresponsible to boot, given the talking points of the far right in response to this speech. Writing headlines is an invaluable skill in today’s newsroom. Headlines make articles discoverable by Google search, they get articles to the top of aggregators like Apple News and they encourage people to share stories on social platforms like Facebook and Twitter. And both the ‘Mean Girls’ and ‘Big Government’ headlines were expertly crafted.  “In Supreme Court, Mean Girls Meet 1st Amendment” is classic high culture meets low culture meets high concept. It instantly grabs our eyes. While the phrases “Supreme Court” and “First Amendment” routinely appear in the same sentence, when “mean girls” shows up in that same space, it piques your curiosity. Also, the headline perfectly sums up the question before the court: When can schools infringe on a student’s right to free speech? Specifically in this case, was it OK for a Pennsylvania high school to discipline a freshman who, after a series of disappointments, took a selfie flying the bird, added some commentary — “F*** school f*** softball f*** cheer f*** everything” — and then posted the image to Snapchat for her 250 followers to see? A fellow cheerleader showed it to her mom/cheer coach (quintessential mean-girls move).  “Big Government Is Back” is the first of four clear takeaways in a story summing up President Biden’s 100th-day address to Congress. The story doesn’t cheer or boo “big government,” it simply points out for context that former President Bill Clinton, also a Democrat, once declared “the era of big government is over.” Biden’s approach to spending is clearly a pivot from both Republican and Democrat predecessors and the story lays out why. Boring headlines attract fewer readers. NPR needs clever headline writers to steer the largest audience possible into its great stories. — Kelly McBride Facts don’t change Some people criticized this note that appeared on a few breaking news items on NPR’s website in April: This is a developing story. Some facts reported by the media may later turn out to be wrong. We will focus on reports from police officials and other authorities, credible news outlets and reporters who are at the scene, and we will update as the situation develops. NPR changed the wording on that note. By definition, a “fact” cannot later turn out to be wrong. This note, from March, has the more appropriate language, and it’s a good example of how slightly tweaked words can leave less room for doubt: This is a developing story. Some things reported by the media will later turn out to be wrong. We will focus on reports from officials and other authorities, credible news outlets and reporters who are at the scene. We will update as the situation develops. The April note has now been updated to reflect that things change but facts do not. These taglines are intended to offer the audience some transparency about breaking news. Reporters do their best to verify the details, but early information is often incomplete or erroneous. It’s great to let the audience in on the process of journalism to build trust, which is what these notes aim to do. Word choices matter, and audience members notice them. — Kayla Randall ‘Third World’ a first-class offense? Catherine Young writes: Today, April 29, 2021, during the Fresh Air interview of the book author of "How Beautiful We Were," the interviewer used the term "Third World." I think he was referring to developing nations (also known as emerging nations, underdeveloped countries and economically developing nations). I feel offended when I hear Third World used this way because it sounds patronizing. Moreover, there is only one world as we know it where humans live which is Planet Earth. The term sounds outdated and not useful in the 21st century. Commonly used to refer to developing countries, the term “third world” is antiquated and has fallen out of favor with many news publications, for the reasons that you specify. Marc Silver, editor of Goats and Soda (NPR’s global health and development blog), called this classification out-of-date, insulting and confusing. “So we decided we would not use First World or Third World, unless there is reason to do so — referring to past ways of thinking or quoting somebody,” he wrote in this 2015 piece. “ ‘Developing countries’ sounds like it might be a better choice.” Former NPR Standards and Practices Editor Mark Memmott wrote a 2017 memo about the term, in which he acknowledged that NPR journalists had referred to “third world” nations a few times. Memmott said NPR basically agrees with The Associated Press to avoid use of the term, quoting the AP saying “developing nations” is more appropriate. In his conversation with author Imbolo Mbue, Fresh Air guest interviewer Arun Venugopal intended to use the term “third world” in an ironic way, as a nod toward the patronizing gaze that many in the West adopt. “My question to Imbolo Mbue was meant to be a subtle form of postcolonial solidarity, between someone of Indian descent (myself) and someone from Cameroon. The question hit upon the incredible condescension of many philanthropists in the West towards developing nations, at a particular moment in history,” Venugopal told me in an email. “As someone who felt that icky-ness firsthand, I used the term ‘Third World’ as a way to signal that condescension. I meant it to sound facetious. In retrospect, I realize that wasn’t necessarily clear to all listeners, and that I could’ve made it more clear by saying something like ‘the so-called Third World’ or the more acceptable term ‘the developing world.’ ”   Using “so-called” beforehand — the audio equivalent of air quotes — would have made a big difference. A lesson here: Sometimes what interviewers mean to convey through their wording is completely lost on the audience. Interviews can be tricky that way. “Third world” aside, this interview is a pleasant and thought-provoking listen for book nerds. — Amaris Castillo Spotlight On The Public Editor spends a lot of time examining moments where NPR fell short. Yet we also learn a lot about NPR by looking at work that we find to be compelling and excellent journalism. Here we share a line or two about the pieces where NPR shines. Open minds Jeannie Phan for NPR LIFE KIT You're Probably Not As Open-Minded As You Think. Here's How To Practice Questioning who we think we are and providing tips on how to improve? That’s classic Life Kit. In a recent episode, the show asked listeners to examine their own ability for open-mindedness — and acknowledged that people probably aren’t as open-minded as they think they are. Minds can be open to many things: ideas, perspectives, possibilities. And Life Kit makes it clear that not everything deserves consideration, like thoughts that are “flat-out dehumanizing or racist or disconnected from reality.” The episode is a fascinating ride that traverses implicit bias, curiosity and what it actually means to have an open mind. — Kayla Randall A stand against sexualization Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images WEEKEND EDITION SUNDAY German Gymnasts Cover Their Legs In Stand Against Sexualization Recently, three female gymnasts defied convention when they chose to wear full-body unitards instead of the typical legless leotards. The move by members of the German women’s team at the European Artistic Gymnastics Championships caused a stir and served as a protest against what is described as sexualization in gymnastics. Weekend Edition Sunday host Lulu Garcia-Navarro brought us an illuminating conversation with Elizabeth Daniels, a psychology professor at the University of Colorado who has written on the sexualization of female athletes. The interview is part history, part psychology and a valued addition to the overall conversation of life for women in sports. — Amaris Castillo The Office of the Public Editor is a team. Researchers Amaris Castillo and Kayla Randall make this newsletter possible. We are still reading all of your messages on Facebook, Twitter and from our inbox. As always, keep them coming. Kelly McBride NPR Public Editor Chair, Craig Newmark Center for Ethics & Leadership at the Poynter Institute Kelly McBride, Public Editor Kayla Randall, NPR Amaris Castillo, Poynter Institute The Public Editor stands as a source of independent accountability. Created by NPR's board of directors, the Public Editor serves as a bridge between the newsroom and the audience, striving to both listen to the audience's concerns and explain the newsroom's work and ambitions. The office ensures NPR remains steadfast in its mission to present fair, accurate and comprehensive information in service of democracy. Read more from the NPR Public Editor, contact us, or follow us on Twitter. You received this message because you're subscribed to Public Editor emails. This email was sent by National Public Radio, Inc., 1111 North Capitol Street NE, Washington, DC 20002 Unsubscribe  |  Privacy Policy