‘Labour planned to assassinate Idi Amin‘ shouts the Sunday Herald. Only, that’s not what David Owen said at all. Interviewed on Radio 4 over the weekend, he said he’s raised the idea, but it hadn’t been viewed remotely positively. Indeed, the Sunday Herald’s own story quotes his next sentence:
‘I’m not ashamed of considering it, because his regime goes down in the scale of Pol Pot as one of the worst of all regimes. It was a disgrace on us all that he was allowed to stay in office for as long as he did.’
…and that’s it. There is no more information that would lead one to the headline. Not in the printed story, anyway. So: do the journalists know something they haven’t bothered telling us, or was their editor too lazy to read his own front-page copy and write an appropriate headline? Or were they just trying to shock people into buying more papers?
1 thought on “Bad headlines”
Sell more papers? Good grief, how awful! And there’s me thinking the papers presented a complete and full unbaised view of life 😉
It’s the summer, and as Ian pointed out last week when he read EVERY Friday edition in the pub, there really ain’t nowt happening at the mo’
My current best is a particular pro-Labour (NOT) tabloid earlier this year, front page, big and bold:
MORTGAGE RATES CRASH!
which, when reading the story, should’ve read:
IF THINGS CONTINUE AS PREDICTED FOR THE NEXT 12 MONTHS THE RATES MAY WELL FALL
which, of course, is bigger and less attention grabbing than the front page can allow 😉