The Shitty Poetry of New York Times Headlines

June 18, 2012 § Leave a comment

It may be a recency bias on my part, but I feel like over the years the New York Times‘s headlines have picked up a certain florid bent wherever a headline can possibly bear it.

Instead of “Studies of Human Microbiome Yield New Insights”, we get: “Tending the Body’s Microbial Garden”. (The first, substantial headline shows up in Google results and in a browser’s title bar. The second, flowery one shows up on the front page.)

Instead of “Noise Complaints On the Rise At Work”, we get: “From Cubicles, Cry for Quiet Pierces Office Buzz”.

Really, a cry? A cry pierces the office buzz? Why is it necessary for a newspaper to doll up the headlines with this trite flowery diction? The stylization isn’t even remotely interesting — it’s really cheap, almost arbitrary prettification. “Noise” becomes “buzz”, “complaint” becomes “cry”, “office” becomes “cubicles” — everything in the translation from prose to poetry is straightforward and bland.

Often you can see the flowery stuff tacked on at the end of a serviceable headline, just to disappoint you:

“Food Trucks in Paris? U.S. Cuisine Finds Open Minds, and Mouths”

“Theater Review: A Fresh Breeze in Pastoral Russia”

Here are a few more examples, so you know I’m not cherry-picking. All of these headlines have appeared in the last thirty days:

  • In Its First Life, an Oil Platform; in Its Next, a Reef?
  • Critic’s Notebook: Trappings of Art, From Tank to Coffin
  • Out There: A Career Waiting for E.T. to Phone
  • Books of The Times: Sexy Drug Dealers Have Parents, Too
  • Design Notebook: Slipping Into Something More Comfortable
  • Domestic Lives: Unencumbered, Even by Regret
  • Collecting: From Savior to Orphan
  • A Richer Life by Seeing the Glass Half Full
  • When a Boy Found a Familiar Feel in a Pat of the Head of State
  • Risky Rise of the Good-Grade Pill  [ugh, the alliteration]

You might have noticed the preponderance of colons in these. You know the old pattern for academic paper titles or lectures, where a plain title and a self-conscious jokey title balance teetering on either side of a colon? Something like: “Gender Ambiguity in Macbeth’s Three Witches: Crones With Cocks”. This is a common pattern for insecure, uneasy writers who are queasy about their concessions to attention-grabbing (or who, being academics and professionals, are hopelessly awkward in the marketing part).

Like I said above, there’s often one utilitarian headline for page titles (and search results) and a second flowery one. To me, this hedge looks like a form of search engine optimization — you can search for the plain summary headline in Google, but readers browsing the front page get the more eye-catching one. So it’s, naturally, a marketing/audience thing. But boy, am I insulted by their take on what I want to read. The purple touches here are like a socialite’s condescending take on what the masses would find poetic and earnest.

I wish the Times would cut it out. This hedge between journalism and pop writing makes them look bad at both. How refreshing (and how rare) when you read the writing of a confident voice, who actually draws strength from the directness and precision and — not paradoxically at all — the richness of their writing. Does this purple stuff actually sell??

I was happy to stumble on this efficient palate-cleanser from the same newspaper: Healthy Women Advised Not to Take Calcium and Vitamin D to Prevent Fractures. Now that’s journalism.

Tagged: , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading The Shitty Poetry of New York Times Headlines at Yash Parghi.


%d bloggers like this: