In a recent New Yorker piece, Maria Konnikova pondered the art and expedience ofheadline writing. In short, there’s psychology and journalistic agenda at play. Getting the reader’s attention is foremost, of course. And first impressions always matter.
But there’s also something more subtle at play, points out Konnikova: “The headline frames the rest of the experience.” It “changes the way people read an article and they remember it.” Indeed.
Which brings me to a recent prominent headline in the Tampa Bay Times: “Penalty Phase Of Obamacare Looms.” It was a New York Times service piece to which client papers affix their own headlines.
Interestingly enough, the NYT piece never mentioned “Obamacare,” per se. It referred to the “Obama Administration’s Affordable Care Act” and its penalty provision that will take effect for the first time this year.
It’s an example of careless journalism in the name of layout expedience.
In general, the media has taken what, as we well know, started out as a partisan Republican pejorative about health care reform and mainstreamed it–along with its anti-Obama connotations. That’s just lazy journalism. Arguably, it impacts the way a lot of people would–as noted earlier–read and remember an item.
But now, alas, we’re used to those ubiquitous “Obamacare” references. The media has had its way–as have polarizing “Obamacare” adversaries.