Yes, the specs are bad sometimes. The publisher's background is in reporting (where you are apparently permitted free license to trash-talk all headlines, if our reporters are any indication).<p>A typical scenario: we choose a lead story for the front page. The editor or ME will say, "Let's make sure it gets big play." Big play in our paper typically means a four- or five-column centerpiece with a huge-ass photo and a honking, single-deck headline stretched across said photo. (Side note: that photo more often than not will convey something entirely opposite of the story, and the headline, but that's another issue.)<p>After that's set up, the ME or editor will say, "Now, let's make sure we get the key words into the headline." That comes regardless of topic ... accommodations tax scandal, Iraq, sniper case, anything in Afghanistan in 2001-02 ...<p>Occasionally, I'll be privy to the meeting where this stuff is decided, and I"ll pipe up -- "We can't fit such-and-such word into those specs, and that's the key word. What shall we say in that head?" But for the most part, we set ourselves up to fail.<p>Of course last night, with Bush's blathering speech, we set up a hugh, glaring lead headline, with TWO decks ... and there was nothing to say....<p>The ME actually got to see the problem scenario in action the other night, when he and I struggled the full 15 minutes prior to deadline to fit the truth, nuance and "key words" of said accommodations tax scandal story into a single deck in which "This is what will fit here" fit PERFECTLY. Oh, sure, there was a subhead. Six words fit there. Could we change the hed specs? SURE .. but that would involve cutting the story and we CAN'T cut this story!!! <p>So ... the shit filters went to work and came up with the atrocious: Tax vote questioned Promoter voted as councilman<p>And the morning that showed up on peoples' doors was the morning the publisher vented her frustrations.
|