Editors should really proof read headlines

There’s a lot to be said for proof-reading. All writers should first proof-read their own work and then make sure a number of other people proof-read it too. You simply can not successfully proof your own stuff. But when it comes to headlines in newspapers and the like, you’d think the editors in charge would at least double check all the headlines. Not true, if these are any indication:

headline1

“Crack found in man’s buttocks”

Thank goodness for that. Imagine the poor man’s distress if there wasn’t one.

headline2

“One-armed man applauds the kindness of strangers”

This one is just cruel.

headline3

“Chick accuses some of her male colleagues of sexism”

A terribly unfortunate surname.

headline4

“Utah Posion Control Centre reminds everyone not to take poison”

Good old Utah, looking after their citizenry.

headline5

“Rangers get whiff of Colon”

That’s what you get for following too closely.

headline6

“Keegan fills Schmeichel’s gap with Seaman”

An old one but a classic.

headline7

“Federal Agents Raid Gun Shop, Find Weapons”

Imagine their surprise!

headline9

Army vehicle disappears An Australia Army vehicle worth $74,000 has gone missing after being painted with camouflage.”

Try looking among the trees. This one is by far my favourite. I just love the slightly surreal idiocy of it.

.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • Technorati
  • RSS
  • Twitter

9 thoughts on “Editors should really proof read headlines

  1. On the other hand, there are a number of Journalists out there bursting with pride that they got those headlines approved and published.

  2. Funny stuff. Colon’s name is actually pronounced like “Cologne,” so that’s probably how the writer sold the title to his editor, but I can’t imagine that neither one realized how people would interpret it.

  3. It’s not just the headlines that the proof readers should be shot for :

    “Utah Poisin Control centre responded to over 50,000 calls, the majority of which were about actual potential poisonings”

    Is that an actual poisoning? Or a potential one? Or both perhaps?

  4. Pretty sure that army vehicle was one of the LandRovers up at Robertson Barrack in Darwin where I used to be… there’s a classic story about one being left behind on exercise up there.

Leave a Comment