CNN article talking about India's Prime Minister visiting the US.
Let me just clarify that the content of this article is perfectly fine and dandy as far bias and honest reporting are concerned. The focus of this blog post is on the misleading headline "Why India's leader won't eat with Obama"
If you were to read that headline without clicking through to the content of the article, which studies indicate is roughly 44% of you, what would be your first impression? If you're like me, your first thought was something along the lines of "Oh why doesn't India's leader want to eat with Obama? Did Obama offend him in some way? Is he refusing to eat with Obama out of protest for some US policy he disagrees with?" After all, the President isn't always on great terms with world leaders, such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel after the NSA was exposed to be spying on her personally, or highly tense relationship he has with Russian President Vladimir Putin over the Syrian and Ukrainian conflicts. It is somewhat believable that India's prime minister also has some reason to take issue with Obama over some issue.
Turns out that the Indian prime minister, Narendra Modi, "will be in the middle of a strict fast for Navratri, Sanskrit for nine nights." during his visit to the US, and subsequently during his dinner with the President. Wouldn't a clearer headline, such as "Indian Prime Minister visiting US during Hindu fast" or "India's leader unable to eat during US visit", prevent the casual headline skimmer from getting the wrong idea? I understand that online news sources need to drive traffic through provocative headlines, but this does not excuse outright misdirection. Headlines are arguably more important than the content of the article itself, and should therefore be subject to more scrutiny for honest journalism.
It seems that headlines like this one are used all too often to create drama and encourage viewers to click through to the article. While it will grab the attention of people who otherwise would have ignored the article, I agree that it's very misleading and unnecessary. For every person who will click through and see what the actual story is, there is someone who will come to their own conclusion as they scroll by it.
ReplyDelete