Is there anything more disconcerting than a headline without bulk underneath?
U
June 27, 2012
3 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Is there anything more disconcerting than a headline without bulk underneath?
U
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Theme: Rubric. Blog at WordPress.com.
Yes! “Bulk” without a headline to indicate content so that you have to read at least some of it before you find out that it’s not worth reading.
Comment by David — June 27, 2012 @ 11:59 |
Recently my local “news” paper has been running unfortunate headlines along side totally inappropriate (and unrelated photographs). That’s disconcerting and quite funny at the same time.
Example: They ran a headline about a fatal crash involving a teenager–no other detail about what kind of crash (always a tragic story). Directly underneath the article, they printed a picture of a teenager in mid-somersault on a trampoline–head down, feet in the air. It was both in poor taste, ironic, and ridiculous. That’s just one example. I wonder if the editors are letting a summer intern take charge of the front page?
Comment by Lorna's Voice — June 27, 2012 @ 12:25 |
Lorna, a summer intern might come in useful. Fresh eyes, not yet jaded. Knowing that tragedy and the ridiculous can run alongside each other. If only to wake up the reader.
Know what you mean though. Can’t remember detail this minute but one of the broadsheets excelled itself the other day. They were making a case for something only to be contradicted by a quarter page advert, the space of which they had managed to sell. It was excruciating. My alarm bells always go on when I don’t know whether to laugh or to cry. I’d love to be a paper’s chief editor. If only to experience the sensation of shooting myself in the foot every five minutes. Can you imagine the trepidation with which you’d open your very own paper every morning?
U
Comment by Ursula — June 27, 2012 @ 12:59 |