Do you ever just read the headlines and not the full story in a newspaper, in print or online?
When you do read the full story do you ever feel that the headline has misrepresented the subject?
How does the positioning of a story determine whether or not you read the headline and how much weight you give it when you do?
Are you more likely to read a story when the headline is about a disaster or something negative than when it is about something positive?
How often do people send you news stories to read? Are you likely to read it or not depending more on the headline or the person who sent it?
When you read a headline do you ever think about the person who wrote it? Do you ever wonder what
their motivation might be?
Are you more likely to read a story if there is a powerful headline or if there is a compelling photograph?
What can a headline do that photograph can't, and vice versa?
As an exercise, look at a newspaper online or in print and think about how you might rewrite the headlines on all of the major stories.
(I would suggest this be done in a group with everybody looking at the same newspaper edition.)
Make up three different headlines for each of the following “newsworthy” events:
The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo.
The bombing of Pearl Harbor.
The Hamas attack on Israel.
The death of Sister Teresa.
The resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The 1954 Supreme Court decision reversing school segregation.
The Supreme Court decision reversing Roe V Wade.
Do you believe that in most newspapers there is true separation between the news side, the editorial side and
the advertising side? If not can you cite an example where the headline reveals the influence of advertising or an editorial perspective on the news?