Sunday, September 7, 2008

Writing a headline that's interesting, but true?

In a Chicago Tribune article (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-fermilab-explainer_bd07sep07,0,1577860.story) from Sunday, Sept. 7, the headline reads,

"Why the earth could actually end when the new collider fires up"


This headline is meant to catch the readers attention — and it did for me. The article goes through to explain how a new particle accelerator may be strong enough to form tiny black holes. Some fear that the black holes will multiply, creating a bigger black hole that could swallow the earth. But it's not probable, scientists say.

By reading the headline, it sounds like the earth will be pending some sort of doom this week. After reading through the entire article, it's clear that the world will still exist after the collider starts. But is it right to have a headline like that when pending doom is not true?

For this particular story, I think it is OK because the entire story has a slightly relaxed tone.
It has lines like: "The most far-out fear is that the device's little black holes could blossom into big ones, with gravity so strong that they swallow first the collider, then the Swiss-French countryside, then the Earth as a whole. Burp."

And also: "If the collider does manage to produce tiny, short-lived black holes, most physicists think that would be . . . pretty sweet, actually."

The headline serves its purpose in getting the reader interested in the subject. I think that is more important than telling the reader exactly what is in the story, because then the reader actually has to read the text to understand.

1 comment:

Unknown said...

This is quite a compelling headline. It made me read your post! Interestingly scary!