The worst headline is one that contains a factual error. Bad headlines are ones that are bland, and don't tell the reader anything specific, like 'Democrats at it Again.'
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
You say something stupid and the next morning you're in the headlines.
I, perhaps wrongly, assume that people actually read articles that interest them rather than just headlines.
I'm smart enough to know, 'Don't try and make any headlines.'
Well-reported news is a public good; bad news is bad for everyone.
There is nothing likely to get you a bigger headline than attacking your own party.
Writing headlines is a specialty - there are outstanding writers who will tell you they couldn't write a headline to save their lives.
Headlines, in a way, are what mislead you because bad news is a headline, and gradual improvement is not.
It's no longer just reporting the headlines of the day, but trying to put the headlines into some context and to add some perspective into what they mean.
If there's a good review, I'll skip over the headline, but I always find the bad reviews and read those. I don't know why. It's a little sick and demented.
Headlines are so great in a sense that they can take a little bit from an article completely out of context and blow it into something it's not. Some people really only read headlines.