Staff Report
EDITOR’S NOTE: This editorial represents the opinion of the Hays Free Press/News-Dispatch and is separate from the newspaper’s news reporting.
Merriam-Webster defines a headline as, “a head of a newspaper story or article usually printed in large type and giving the gist of the story or article that follows.”
According to The MIT Press, “The language is meant to be short, summative and sharp. The words bring the crucial elements of the story to the forefront and the grammar and syntax drum up intensity, if needed.”
For the staff at the Hays Free Press/News-Dispatch, our goal is to make headlines approximately seven to nine words in length. The reason for this is that in a print newspaper, space and attention are limited. While online news articles offer more space, they generally shorten the attention span further.
The goal, and challenge, of a headline is to get the information across in as few words as possible, to catch the attention of the reader and entice them to learn more within the story.
“It is meant to capture the attention of the reader without, ideally, compromising the essence of the story. Because headlines not only lure, they also direct the attention of the reader,” said The MIT Press.
Given these specific constraints, a headline is unable to include every fact, position, qualification or perspective offered in the story. If it did, it would be a story in itself. Therefore, the standard becomes whether or not the reporting supports the headline, not whether all of the information is included in the headline.
So, what happens when a reader stops at reading the headline?
They miss crucial facts, context and information that is only contained within the words of the story itself.
Over the last few weeks, criticisms of the Hays Free Press/News-Dispatch have centered around the merits of a few headlines, with claims labeling them “misleading.”
Not the facts in the story, not the conversations surrounding the issues, not the context, but the headline at the top, meant only as a quick, efficient way to frame the main point of a story or the “gist” as one might call it.
And let us be clear, one of the headlines in question could have been more accurate. It was not wrong, but we did decide for clarity's sake to update it, although these individuals were still unsatisfied with the extended version.
In these cases, when we questioned people about the content of the story, we learned that those shouting the loudest hadn’t even gone so far as to read it.
If they had, they would have recognized that the information included in the story provided not only support for the headline, but further context and the actual words of people involved in the meetings in question.
We understand that headlines are extremely important. They shape perspective and give the reader a high-level look at the topic of discussion. Thus, they should be crafted with a high level of care. They should not, however, be expected to tell the story in its entirety.
Another term that has been thrown around is “journalistic integrity.”
For those unfamiliar, the Society of Professional Journalists has a very clear Code of Ethics that includes the following:
• Seek truth and report it
• Minimize harm
• Act independently
• Be accountable and transparent
These four pillars represent the responsibilities of writers and news organizations. While these principles are not a set of rules, they are a guide through which we process and publish information.
Specifically, at the Hays Free Press/News-Dispatch, we pride ourselves on providing as much information on a topic as possible. In municipal or county government meetings, we try our best to provide thoughts not only from each member of the governing body, but also any public comments available from meeting attendees. This often leads to longer, more detailed stories than many of our counterparts.
And, don’t get us wrong, we understand that longer stories take more time to read. Each of us reads the entirety of the papers every week before publication. Some weeks, that is quick; other weeks, it takes much longer.
We also recognize that we are not perfect. Despite our best efforts, things sometimes slip through the cracks and when they do, we promptly fix them and are transparent about the fact that they have been corrected.
If, or rather when, mistakes happen, we welcome the feedback. If, after reading a story in its entirety, someone believes something was inaccurate, incomplete or unclear, we want to know. There are a great number of people that reach out to us directly and as soon as possible after things are brought to our attention, we review, research and, if necessary, correct.
That being said, there is a difference between a story being unclear and a reader disagreeing with the information in the story. The job of a journalist is not to tell readers the story they want to hear, but rather to present all sides equally, so that the reader can decide for themselves. This means that one may disagree with what an official said or how the story was relayed and that is okay.
As journalists, we are responsible for being accurate, fair, transparent, independent and accountable.
Readers have a responsibility to: engage with the information before deciding what it says.
As we have for more than 125 years, we will keep striving to make our headlines clear and concise. We will continue to correct and own up to our mistakes when necessary and we will provide the information, context, quotes, perspectives and facts for readers to make their own judgements.
We ask the same of our readers — before making that judgement, read the story in its entirety.
They say not to judge a book by its cover. In a time when there is tons of unreliable, biased information around every corner and ever-shortening attention spans, a better lesson might be: don’t judge a story by seven to nine words.
