How to write misleading headlines: NPR Edition

Bernie’s campaign cannot win, and therefore he should tone down the rhetoric, prepare his exit and get out soon. That’s the distillation of this NPR piece. But NPR can’t say that and that story is too pro-Hillary and not as clickable.

The solution: grab one word in a pull-quote and throw it in the headline. Now you have a story detailing how Sanders’ own adviser is saying that it’s time to wind down the campaign. Oh, and if you say “After Tuesday,” it could mean last Tuesday’s New York Primary.

Here’s the quote in full by the campaign’s senior adviser, Tad Devine, that doesn’t come until the 12th paragraph:

“If we think we’ve made enough progress, then we’ll keep on the path that we’re on,” Devine said. “If we think we have to, you know, take a different way or reevaluate, you know, we’ll do it then. But right now, we think the best path beyond is the one we laid out months ago.”

The “then” in question is next Tuesday when five states hold primaries. The whole quote is certainly about the campaign’s plan to carry on. You wouldn’t know that from the headline though, or the lede. The first paragraph of the article doesn’t mention upcoming primaries, but New York.

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is waging a campaign at a turning point. The New York primary earlier this week was essentially a must win. And he lost.

It becomes clear reading the quote in whole (well, almost whole since we don’t have the question) that Devine is actually talking about staying on the path that the campaign “laid out months ago.” The alternate title and article could be:

Sanders’ Adviser Says Campaign May Keep on Current Path After Tuesday.

That’s the exact opposite article.

I have no idea if NPR is in the bag for Hillary in the way that The Times or Vox are, but this article is a great example of how a narrative takes hold. Journalists and editors matter, as we saw with The Times story that was initially about Sanders’ effectiveness.

The Washington Post is guilty of their own headline trickery.

Greg Sargent is writing about an appearance by the same Sanders adviser on Rachel Maddow’s MSNBC show. The article is actually about Devine suggesting that super-delegates should follow the will of the voters. Sargent takes this to mean that Sanders’ supporters shouldn’t try to steal the nomination at the convention.

“But I believe that today — that our super-delegates, that our party leaders, should let the voters speak first. And I think if they do, all the way through the end of the voting, that will strengthen our party, and certainly strengthen our hand — if we succeed with voters between now and June.”

Leaving aside that this can be an argument that super-delegates should support Sanders if he wins in pledged delegates, the headline makes it seems like Sanders is getting out of the race.

There’s nothing wrong with Paul Krugman using his op-ed spot to attack Bernie and make the ridiculous claim that the big banks weren’t instrumental to the Great Recession. The bias there is transparent if not any less annoying.

The greater danger is when public trusts like NPR, who we expect to be objective brokers of truth, slyly tilt the narrative. The subtle bias is far more insidious than the overt opinions.

At best, it’s sloppy editing. The reader really has no way of knowing if the headline means last Tuesday or next Tuesday. That is beyond reckless when you consider that five states vote this coming Tuesday; Oregon could be a Sanders landslide and the big delegate states of California and New Jersey don’t vote until June. The message that Sanders’ senior adviser thinks it’s time to “reevaluate” after the New York Primary could cost Sanders votes!

Yes, the race could in effect be over. The math is not great for Sanders and that is a fair article to write. Suggesting (even if inadvertently) that Sanders’ own campaign is ready to call it quits due to their New York loss is irresponsible…or malicious. Whichever it is, it’s bad journalism.

And before you start hearing the fat lady sing, remember that Hillary has the worst favorability ratings of any Democrat and currently is only topped by Donald Trump in negative numbers…

…And she could actually be indicted over those emails.

More importantly, there is more value in a contested primary than a snooze fest coronation. We’ve seen with Trump that the “Attention Economy” has arrived in full force. Attention breeds energy. Energy leads to registration and turnout. Hillary will need all the help she can get in that department.

Beyond the irresponsibility of the press burying Sanders alive, it’s bad for both candidates. At least that’s my opinion, after Tuesday.