US headline writing conventions

[Martha Medea]

Consider the following sample headlines:

Arrest three men at airport (meaning "Three men arrested at airport")
Discover new species of snake (meaning "New snake species discovered")

I know that writers are told to avoid the passive voice as much as possible, but isn't the former construction in each of the two examples just plain wrong?

I made this observation about some headlines written like this and the person responsible said it was a US-style construction, commonly used in US tabloid headlines. He implied that because I speak and write British English it was simply a case of different conventions.

I think he is BSing me to avoid admitting that his written English leaves a lot to be desired.

In case I'm being too cocky here, please tell me - is this, or was this ever an accepted headline writing convention in the US press?

[Polycarp]

My impressions:

In general, "a," "an," "the," and the various forms of "to be" are regularly omitted. Clipped forms of names, etc., that are generally known are acceptable. Nouns modifying nouns are common. Honorifics are omitted. Past participles are SOP.

Mayor Blasts DPW Head is typical. City Braced for Record Snow is common. Eileen Headed for Texas is supposed to convey that the forecast track of Hurricane Eileen is expected to have it make landfall somewhere on the Texas coast. Queen to Visit Tahiti has nothing to do with Freddie Mercury's old band, but deals with Elizabeth II's state visit to Polynesian countries.

Only in New York City tabloids are the active-voice monstrosities of the OP common practice. Bernarr Macfadden was the pioneering spirit in the use of them, and the Daily News and Post seem to find them spiffy.

[Martha Medea]

Thanks Polycarp - I'm going to their websites to gawp at some examples.

[Exapno Mapcase]

It's hard to say that anything, other than a misspelling or typo, can ever be wrong in an American newspaper headline.

They are not conventional writing, either formal or informal, but more like advertisements for the contents of the article. They serve no function but to draw the eye and express the greatest sales value in the concisest space.

The classic New York tabloid headline of all time - Headless Body in Topless Bar - doesn't even contain a verb. The implication is that the body was found in a sleazy bar having been decapitated, but even adding the found would reduce the eye-catching value of the shortened expression.

Headline writing is a genre unto itself and has rules unto itself. It can be done badly, and usually is. But "anything goes" is a good description of the core principle of the genre. Anything that makes you read the article. Anything.

[Ximenean]

Mayor Blasts DPW Head is typical. City Braced for Record Snow is common. Eileen Headed for Texas is supposed to convey that the forecast track of Hurricane Eileen is expected to have it make landfall somewhere on the Texas coast.
These would all work as British newspaper headlines, with minor adjustments such as "heading" instead of "headed". But I can't see how "discover new species of snake" could be read as "a new species of snake has been discovered", any way you slice it, in any mainstream variety of English.

[Martha Medea]

Polycarp (sorry for not bolding your name in my previous post), I looked in the NYDN (the NYP was taking ages to load) and saw nothing comparable to the two examples in the OP. I know the basic conventions from years of exposure to the UK tabloid press and it wasn't that different. They have their own compact, unambiguous logic.

My examples are imperative phrases, which confuses the meaning they aim to convey. The whole point of snappy, zappy, tabloidy headlines, as Exapno Mapcase points out, is to tell you what the story is about in as few words as possible. Ambiguity only gets in the way. Using the active voice in this way comes across like issuing orders to the readers, not informing them about a recent event.

Arrest three men at airport! Discover new species of snake!

I'd really like to see authentic examples using this construction.

Or, should I say - Find headline examples!

[TV time]

Consider the following sample headlines:
Arrest three men at airport (meaning "Three men arrested at airport")
Discover new species of snake (meaning "New snake species discovered")At my paper, or at any paper I have edited I prefer the subject-verb-direct object form. the first would have read "Feds (or locals or cops or troopers) grab three at airport" depending on space. The other "BU (UCLA or ASU or CU or whatever a nearby university is) study finds new snakes".

The only way I would allow one of the ones that you had was if we had a teaser head above it setting it up a bit more. Granted I have always edited broadsheets, but on the first one, I see no purpose for "men". If one of my newseditors came up with the first one, I would ask him to redo it saying "who else does one arrest at an airport?" (yes, I know women) but that would be worth mentioning, not men. (OK, OK the new species of snake). I also find that "arrest" could be improved upon if there had been any sort of confrontation at all.

Regarding the snake headline, I would probably bury that story on the inside somewhere and I wouldn't be too worried about that head, but I would want a local hook, if possible, and I would like that hook in the head. If there is a solid hook, I would definitely want it in the head.

[Intelligently Designed]

Problem is, as Usram implied, "Arrest three men at airport" and "Three men arrested at airport" don't mean the same thing at all. The latter describes a situation, while the former sounds like an order given to police or whatever to go and arrest the guys.

[Liberal]

I've never seen the imperative used that way in a headline, tabloid or otherwise.

[Absolute]

I'm not really sure what the point of your question is - you cite those two examples as something you've seen, and ask whether they're "just plain wrong".

Then, you say:


I'd really like to see authentic examples using this construction.

Or, should I say - Find headline examples!
I thought you had already seen authentic examples, somewhere.

Personally, I have never seen a newspaper headline like that, and would be surprised if I did - they just don't make sense.

"Police arrest three men at airport" and "Scientists discover new species of snake" are along the lines of what seems common.

[Martha Medea]

I'm not really sure what the point of your question is - you cite those two examples as something you've seen, and ask whether they're "just plain wrong".

I thought you had already seen authentic examples, somewhere.

Personally, I have never seen a newspaper headline like that, and would be surprised if I did - they just don't make sense.

"Police arrest three men at airport" and "Scientists discover new species of snake" are along the lines of what seems common.
Let me clarify. The examples in the OP are actual headlines taken from an English language news site I'm doing some work for, which is based in a Latin American country. Most of the writers are non-native English speakers. Here's a thread (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=397937) I posted when I first made contact with them, which will give you an idea of their professional standards.

I'm not going to link directly to the site because of the possibility of them linking back to the thread. You could contact me via my profile, although there's not much point now because the headlines in question have been corrected as a result of my comment to the editor. Also, I'm in charge of content over the weekend and there will be no such abominations on my watch. :D

The editor, who is not a native English speaker but has lived in the US, admitted that he had written these headlines, and justified the style by saying it was a US headline writing convention that I probably wasn't familiar with, being a Brit and all that, while accepting that they were too tabloid-like for his esteemed organ.

The point of my question was, therefore, to find out whether there was indeed such a convention in the United States, or whether he was just engaging in a spot of posterior obfuscation.

[Ximenean]

Maybe the OP meant "how come pithy newspaper headlines are written in the passive voice, when the passive voice is considered bad style?"

And I'd WAG that the answer is that the passive voice is more concise.

"Three men arrested at airport" vs. "Police arrest three men at airport". Either way, you must include "three men", "arrest", and "airport". But with the active voice, you have to say who's doing the arresting.

[RealityChuck]

One point is this: headlines are severely constrained by space. Verbs are left out and other constructions used to conserve space.

"Arrest three men at airport" has two fewer characters than "Three men arrested at airport." That can make a difference when fitting in the headline. Maybe the space was available, but the headline writer would rather keep it short as much as possible. But the extra "ed" in your version could have forced the headline to go onto a second line (bad) or required a reduction in typeface (bad for consistency).

In your second example ("Discover new species of snake"/"New snake species discovered"), your version is a tiny bit longer than the original. That's because "of" counts 1 1/2 for headline spacing while "ed" counts as 2.* The spaces aren't an issue since they can be adjusted. It's possible that the extra 1/2 width for the character would have caused a problem with the headline.

*Characters are given values in proportional newspaper fonts, determined by their width.

[pulykamell]

Consider the following sample headlines:

Arrest three men at airport (meaning "Three men arrested at airport")
Discover new species of snake (meaning "New snake species discovered")

I know that writers are told to avoid the passive voice as much as possible, but isn't the former construction in each of the two examples just plain wrong?

I made this observation about some headlines written like this and the person responsible said it was a US-style construction, commonly used in US tabloid headlines. He implied that because I speak and write British English it was simply a case of different conventions.

I think he is BSing me to avoid admitting that his written English leaves a lot to be desired.

In case I'm being too cocky here, please tell me - is this, or was this ever an accepted headline writing convention in the US press?

I briefly worked on a copy desk, and the headlines you've showed would never be printed. I have never seen such a construction in any English newspaper, American or otherwise. They make no sense. "Arrested: Three Men at Airport" and "Discovered: New Species of Snake," at least makes a modicum of sense, but still wouldn't fly because it just looks and reads stupid. If you want to keep the same words and follow headline writing conventions, you can make the simple "Three Men at Airport Arrested" and "New Species of Snake Discovered," which suffer only from being a bit boring.

TvTime's suggestions are most likely how I would have written the headline. "Cops nab three in airport sting" or whatever the facts are, but something definitely punchier, sexier, and more sensical than "Arrest three men at airport."

[Martha Medea]

According to Polycarp in post 2

Only in New York City tabloids are the active-voice monstrosities of the OP common practice. Bernarr Macfadden was the pioneering spirit in the use of them, and the Daily News and Post seem to find them spiffy.
Yet everyone else is saying headlines like my samples would never be printed in a US publication. That's why I want to see examples of the "active-voice monstrosities" Polycarp says are "common practice in the NY tabloids", to see for myself if what the editor told me has any basis in reality.

BTW I have no problem with the passive voice. I try not to overuse it, but there are times, as has been demonstrated here, where it is the best option.

[twickster]

The point of my question was, therefore, to find out whether there was indeed such a convention in the United States, or whether he was just engaging in a spot of posterior obfuscation.
Definitely the latter. Headlines either have a subject (however abbreviated that subject might be) with an active verb, or are in the passive voice.

[friedo]

Arrest three men at airport (meaning "Three men arrested at airport")
Discover new species of snake (meaning "New snake species discovered")


I've been reading American newspapers of varying levels of quality my entire life, and I have never, ever seen this construction anywhere.

These two examples would almost certainly be written in the manner of those in your parentheses.

[Martha Medea]

If anyone does want to see a link to similar headlines on this particular site, feel free to send me a PM.

[Punoqllads]

I, too, have never seen such a construction in a headline. The only unspoken headline convention that I can think of is that puns are inserted wherever possible. Especially the sports section ("Tide surge swamps Gators")

[Ellis Aponte Jr.]

Am I the first to say YES, I have absolutely seen that type of construction in many a headline, specifically in the New York Post and the New York Daily News. I am in fact very surprised that fellow-Brooklynite Friedo has never come across it. I have not lived everywhere across the country, but based on responses here we are dealing with a New York phenomenon exclusively, and probably only two newspapers at that.

Frankly I find it weird too. I always notice it because it is so awkward.

The main thing to stress is that the examples in the OP are completely within the realm of what you can expect to see in the NYC tabloids - sooner or later, though that isn't the most common kind of phrasing you will see.

[friedo]

The main thing to stress is that the examples in the OP are completely within the realm of what you can expect to see in the NYC tabloids - sooner or later, though that isn't the most common kind of phrasing you will see.

You must be reading some different version of the Post than I, because I haven't seen it. Admittedly, I only read the front page headlines, because I would not be caught dead actually purchasing and opening something so base and common as the Post.

But let's take a sampling of headlines from their website:


CATHOLIC PARISHES SHUT DOWN
REVEALED: LINDSAY'S LUSH REHAB
N.M. GOV TO RUN FOR PREZ.
SHAWN'S STORY OF HOPE


And here are a few from the Daily Snooze:


COP WIDOW'S WORDS BRING JURY TO TEARS
NY LEADING WAY IN CANCER FIGHT
MIKE: WHY ZAP POOR CON-ED?


None of these conform to the grammatical bizarrity of the OP's example.

The only one that might be a bit obscure is the last one from the Snooze, which you'd only understand if you knew that NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg has been defending the electricity company (Consolidated Edison) for their mediocre response to last year's nine-day blackout in Queens.

So tabloid headlines certainly use a great deal of puns, abbreviations and local references, but nothing so bizarre as the examples in the OP. At least, not that I've seen.

[Martha Medea]

Am I the first to say YES, I have absolutely seen that type of construction in many a headline, specifically in the New York Post and the New York Daily News. I am in fact very surprised that fellow-Brooklynite Friedo has never come across it. I have not lived everywhere across the country, but based on responses here we are dealing with a New York phenomenon exclusively, and probably only two newspapers at that.

Frankly I find it weird too. I always notice it because it is so awkward.

The main thing to stress is that the examples in the OP are completely within the realm of what you can expect to see in the NYC tabloids - sooner or later, though that isn't the most common kind of phrasing you will see.
Ellis, you weren't the first, Polycarp said the same thing in post 2, but this was contradicted by both my brief visit to the NYDN website as well as by friedo. This means I can give the editor the benefit of the doubt, but I'd still like to see for myself real life examples of US headlines written in that way, to ascertain if they are really as ungrammatical as my colleague's. Here are a couple more examples from "my" site, which still haven't been corrected.

Says Police chief is mistaken in Assistant DA’s killing
Reveal names, companies, in major Customs smuggling

The Police chief one is even more outlandish than any of the others.

[pulykamell]

The main thing to stress is that the examples in the OP are completely within the realm of what you can expect to see in the NYC tabloids - sooner or later, though that isn't the most common kind of phrasing you will see.

I completely disagree. I occassionally read NY tabloids on line for fun (they are a good read) and have never ever seen such mangled grammar as in the OP. Show us an example and we'll believe you. I'm willing to bet good money that no such construction has ever appeared in the NY tabloids, except possibly in error.

[pulykamell]

Says Police chief is mistaken in Assistant DA’s killing
Reveal names, companies, in major Customs smuggling



Wow. Those are atrocious. You're being too charitable giving your boss the benefit of a doubt.

[Wendell Wagner]

Martha, who makes copyediting policy at the website you're working at? Or is there no policy there, so they just let everyone write what they feel like? If you make policy, then tell everyone that starting headlines with a verb with an understood subject isn't allowed. It doesn't seem to be done anywhere in the English-speaking world except maybe at a couple of New York tabloids (and there's some dispute about even that). If you have input to the policy, tell them that that's what you recommend. Don't most newspapers have copyediting policies that tell writers what level of informality is acceptable and what style will be used in news articles and headlines?

[Martha Medea]

Martha, who makes copyediting policy at the website you're working at? Or is there no policy there, so they just let everyone write what they feel like? If you make policy, then tell everyone that starting headlines with a verb with an understood subject isn't allowed. It doesn't seem to be done anywhere in the English-speaking world except maybe at a couple of New York tabloids (and there's some dispute about even that). If you have input to the policy, tell them that that's what you recommend. Don't most newspapers have copyediting policies that tell writers what level of informality is acceptable and what style will be used in news articles and headlines?
Ah, if only.

The headlines are the least of it. When you get to the actual article text, it's enough to make the eyes bleed.

I've said all this to the editor, as well as to the owner, and their attitude is - "yes, we know - but it's not a priority". They said they would pay me to do the copy-editing if they had more funds, but even so the editor doesn't really like the idea because it would complicate the process which, as you guessed, involves three or four writers doing their thing (using Babelfish in some cases, see the thread I linked to in an earlier post) and putting it up willy nilly.

What they should do is drop one contributor and use that money to pay for someone to do proofreading. (Even better would be to drop all contributors and hire three or four people who actually know how to write in English!) A little less content would not be so bad if it is better quality content. I've been as outspoken as I feel is possible, going as far as to say that most English speakers will be put off by such poor writing, but as none of them are native English speakers, they can't realise just how bad it is. The fact that even after me pointing out the particular error that I highlighted in this thread, two items are still up with headlines like this shows what I'm up against.

They do get some reader feedback apparently, in fact that's how I ended up covering the weekend content. Every writer needs an editor, and I feel a little uneasy about writing and posting articles without another pair of eyes looking over my work.

It could be that the editor feels somewhat rattled by someone who is rocking his cozy little boat? I'll have to re-emphasise that I'm not interested in a full time office job but that I'm happy to do stuff from home at all hours.

[Ellis Aponte Jr.]

OK. Here's one example. Read the third paragraph down in this link, the part about Gina Lollobridgida:

http://www.trivia-library.com/a/History-of-newspapers-the-new-york-daily-news-part-2.htm

[Ellis Aponte Jr.]

It's not just New York. Check out the Detroit News:

http://www.rarenewspapers.com/viewissue.aspx?ID=216276

[BJMoose]

The practice of omiting the subject from a headline used to be much more common (newspapers have their fads, too). I figure most editors got away from it for the reason folks in this thread object to it: it reads weird.

It's worthwhile to reiterate RealityChuck's comments about space limitations, since that is what drives the "oddball" constructions found in heads. (But some papers seem to be getting sloppy about making headlines "count out"; i.e. fill the available space. Course, using 60- or 72-point type for multi-line one-column heads virtually guarantees the right edge will be very ragged; mebbe they should go back to center-justifying such headlines.)

[aldiboronti]

I can attest to the existence of these odd headline constructions. I remember coming across examples last year in a book on the St Valentine's Day Massacre. The book had photos of several Chicago newspapers of the period, several of which used the strange imperative. I wrote to a word forum concerning it because it was the first time I'd ever seen such a usage. There I was informed that this was a common usage in the past, although rarer now.

[pulykamell]

OK. Here's one example. Read the third paragraph down in this link, the part about Gina Lollobridgida:

http://www.trivia-library.com/a/History-of-newspapers-the-new-york-daily-news-part-2.htm

OK, I suppose I didn't limit the search to modern newspapers, but those examples are from over a half-century ago. This is not standard headlining practice anywhere now.

[Polycarp]

I think I may see where I inadvertently led Martha astray: The subjectless active-vocie headlines were the construction used by a number of tabloids, including the two survivors, some years back. I remember seeing them in the 1960s, when my relatives got the Daily News and the old Daily Mirror. Whether they are common today (apparently not) is something a Bigappelitarian would have to speak to.

[Ellis Aponte Jr.]

No doubt, we are talking about a practice that is old-fashioned, passe, and frowned upon, but I swear it isn't dead. I've only been reading the NYC papers since the 1990s and I see it regularly. Maybe it's rare on the front page nowadays, but in the back pages, where space is tight between the ads, NAB 5 IN HEIST or BUST LOTTO SCAM may still appear. "Common"? It depends... is once a week common? I found those 50 year-old citations with a cursory, haphazard search. If anyone wants to sign up to access the New York Post archive on-line I guarantee more recent examples.

[guizot]

It's hard to say that anything, other than a misspelling or typo, can ever be wrong in an American newspaper headline.

They are not conventional writing, either formal or informal, but more like advertisements for the contents of the article. They serve no function but to draw the eye and express the greatest sales value in the concisest space.I disagree completely. Headlines in U.S. newspapers are highly convention-driven, and the examples in OP are clearly marked (as counter-conventional). I'd list the conventions, but I've got to go now; but all you have to do is open a copy of the Times to see. Okay, well, let's see...

1) present tense for recent events
2) past tense for things long ago
3) articles dropped
4) copula (be) dropped whenever possible
5) passive (without "be" or "get")
6) dropped helping verbs with progressive aspect

...there's more....

[pulykamell]

No doubt, we are talking about a practice that is old-fashioned, passe, and frowned upon, but I swear it isn't dead. I've only been reading the NYC papers since the 1990s and I see it regularly. Maybe it's rare on the front page nowadays, but in the back pages, where space is tight between the ads, NAB 5 IN HEIST or BUST LOTTO SCAM may still appear.

I suppose I may be wrong. It's a good thing I'm not a betting man. :) Although it's not yet been shown this has been used in modern day headlines, I do believe that you have seen them. What I don't understand is why anyone would write a headline like that these days, being that they are seen as very awkward, and that they can easily be rewritten (e.g. BUST LOTTO SCAM = LOTTO SCAM BUSTED.) Especially with modern typesetting, headline writing is a bit more flexible. Two extra letters is not going to throw a headline off.

[pulykamell]

If anyone wants to sign up to access the New York Post archive on-line I guarantee more recent examples.

You can search recent articles for free. You do need a search term, though. I used "the," and it gave me 2,916. I read through 256 of them until coming across this:


SLAY RAP IN 1974 SHOOTING
By ERIKA MARTINEZ and DENISE BUFFA

January 18, 2007 -- A career criminal who shot a man over a dice game in the South Bronx more than three decades ago has been re-arrested and indicted for murder now that his victim has died, authorities said yesterday.


I still can't figure out what that headline means, but I think it fits the OP's grammar. I think. Perhaps somebody can translate that for me.

[Polycarp]

I suppose I may be wrong. It's a good thing I'm not a betting man. :) Although it's not yet been shown this has been used in modern day headlines, I do believe that you have seen them. What I don't understand is why anyone would write a headline like that these days, being that they are seen as very awkward, and that they can easily be rewritten (e.g. BUST LOTTO SCAM = LOTTO SCAM BUSTED.) Especially with modern typesetting, headline writing is a bit more flexible. Two extra letters is not going to throw a headline off.

No, it won't -- when you have computerized typesetting (actually producing a photoffset master) and can go with 32.5-point type. But in the day when they actually set type, your headline needed to fit, and to be one of a few specific point sizes, the bigger the better.

[pulykamell]

No, it won't -- when you have computerized typesetting (actually producing a photoffset master) and can go with 32.5-point type. But in the day when they actually set type, your headline needed to fit, and to be one of a few specific point sizes, the bigger the better.

When I did my stint on a copy desk, that's exactly how we got headlines. We were basically given a count of how many lines and a point count (I'm not exactly sure whether it was called a point count or something else). Our little green screened terminals (anybody remember the names of these?) would give you a count, and IIRC, our headlines would have to be with +-2 of the specified count.

[Ellis Aponte Jr.]

Three days ago in the Daily News:

http://www.nydailynews.com/01-17-2007/news/story/489330p-412105c.html

and last month...

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/nydailynews/access/1172361431.html?dids=1172361431:1172361431&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Dec+1%2C+2006&author=THOMAS+ZAMBITO+DAILY+NEWS+STAFF+WRITER&pub=New+York+Daily+News&edition=&startpage=97&desc=BUST+2+DOCS+IN+FRAUD+SCAM

[Martha Medea]

OK, now I'm satisfied that this wasn't a product of the editor's fevered imagination. Thanks for taking the time to come up with these examples, pulykamell and Ellis, and thanks for the clarification, Polycarp.

[Garfield226]

What I don't understand is why anyone would write a headline like that these days, being that they are seen as very awkward, and that they can easily be rewritten (e.g. BUST LOTTO SCAM = LOTTO SCAM BUSTED.) Especially with modern typesetting, headline writing is a bit more flexible. Two extra letters is not going to throw a headline off.
Usually two letters won't throw a headline off. Sometimes they will. What's more troublesome is when the word order matters. This might occur when you have a two-line headline in one or two columns:

"Two Men Murdered" might fit, with "Two Men" on the first line and "Murdered" on the second. Likewise, "Killed Two Men" would fit, same deal. However, the short-long-short pattern would NOT fit over two lines, even if the letter count was the same.

[Musicat]

Usually two letters won't throw a headline off. Sometimes they will. What's more troublesome is when the word order matters. This might occur when you have a two-line headline in one or two columns:

"Two Men Murdered" might fit, with "Two Men" on the first line and "Murdered" on the second. Likewise, "Killed Two Men" would fit, same deal. However, the short-long-short pattern would NOT fit over two lines, even if the letter count was the same.Most amateur headline writers use too many words. As an editor myself, if space were a premium, I would say "Two Murdered". The fact that they were men is less important than the fact that more than one was murdered (men are murdered all the time, but two at once is a bigger news story). Or, if you disagree, use "Men Murdered" or even "Murdered". That's enough to catch an eye.

I can't make any sense out of those strange examples in the Daily News.

[pulykamell]

Most amateur headline writers use too many words. As an editor myself, if space were a premium, I would say "Two Murdered". The fact that they were men is less important than the fact that more than one was murdered (men are murdered all the time, but two at once is a bigger news story). Or, if you disagree, use "Men Murdered" or even "Murdered". That's enough to catch an eye.

I can't make any sense out of those strange examples in the Daily News.

And I'm still scratching my head over "SLAY RAP IN 1974 SHOOTING". What does that mean????

Anyhow, a headline's job is to capture attention and convey info. If I'm still hear scratching my head over what in the heck a headline is trying to convey, it's obviously not doing its job.

[Ragiel]

And I'm still scratching my head over "SLAY RAP IN 1974 SHOOTING". What does that mean????

Anyhow, a headline's job is to capture attention and convey info. If I'm still hear scratching my head over what in the heck a headline is trying to convey, it's obviously not doing its job.

"Slay rap" would be the murder charge [brought] as a result of the 1974 shooting. I think.

[Ellis Aponte Jr.]

"Slay rap" would be the murder charge [brought] as a result of the 1974 shooting. I think.

Correct. Slay in tabloidese often means murder as a noun. Thus slay rap=murder rap=murder charge.

"Only in New York" headline here:

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/nydailynews/access/1153628601.html?dids=1153628601:1153628601&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Oct+29%2C+2006&author=Brendan+Brosh+and+Robert+F.+Moore&pub=New+York+Daily+News&edition=&startpage=8&desc=FALAFEL+SPAT+SPARKS+SLAY

[groman]

I still can't figure out what that headline means, but I think it fits the OP's grammar. I think. Perhaps somebody can translate that for me.

I don't think it fits OP's grammar. In this case the headline is lacking a verb with "Slay rap" being a noun and the verb "is" is implied. In the OP's case even if you take "arrest" as a noun there's no implied verb that makes it make any sort of sense unless "Three men at airport made an arrest" was the intended meaning.

If I saw something like the OP describes in an actual newspaper I would assume it was a typographical error -- because it is not a shorthand, it's actually wrong.

I would actually expect information on how I can discover new species of snakes if I saw an article entitled "Discover new species of snake". Much like if you see something entitled "Make money in bed" you would not assume it meant "Money made in bed" you would assume "How to make money in bed" as implied meaning.

[groman]

"Only in New York" headline here:

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/nydailynews/access/1153628601.html?dids=1153628601:1153628601&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Oct+29%2C+2006&author=Brendan+Brosh+and+Robert+F.+Moore&pub=New+York+Daily+News&edition=&startpage=8&desc=FALAFEL+SPAT+SPARKS+SLAY


I am not sure if you are giving this as an example of OP-style headline or an example of using "slay" as a noun. However if the former, that is correct usage, unlike OP's examples which are not correct usage. The intended meaning (I really hope) is not "Slay sparked by spay falafelled"

[guizot]

Anyhow, a headline's job is to capture attention and convey info. If I'm still hear scratching my head over what in the heck a headline is trying to convey, it's obviously not doing its job.That's obvious, but sometimes it's just a question of layout. If there's space on a particular line (once the font, etc. have been determined), you can say "President is Impeached," rather than "President Impeached."

[pulykamell]

I don't think it fits OP's grammar. In this case the headline is lacking a verb with "Slay rap" being a noun...

Ah, I get it now. "Slay rap" = "murder rap." However, Ellis did indeed, much to my surprise, pull out two contemporary New York Daily News headlines that do follow the OP's grammar, so *shrug*, I guess it is an isolated New York thang.

[pulykamell]

That's obvious, but sometimes it's just a question of layout. If there's space on a particular line (once the font, etc. have been determined), you can say "President is Impeached," rather than "President Impeached."

Oh, I understand. Like I said, I used to do this to quite rigid constraints. However, there is no confusion in meaning in "President Impeached" v. "President Is Impeached" (although I would avoid the "is" personally). If a particular headline wasn't working based on the specs we were given, we'd start from scratch with a new headline rather than try forcing a square peg into a round hole.

[Marley23]

I've never seen the imperative used that way in a headline, tabloid or otherwise.
Neither have I. You can ask your reader to assume the police did the arresting, but why? You can say "three arrested at airport" without confusing anyone.

[guizot]

Consider the following sample headlines:

Arrest three men at airport (meaning "Three men arrested at airport")
Discover new species of snake (meaning "New snake species discovered")

I know that writers are told to avoid the passive voice as much as possible, but isn't the former construction in each of the two examples just plain wrong?

I made this observation about some headlines written like this and the person responsible said it was a US-style construction, commonly used in US tabloid headlines. He implied that because I speak and write British English it was simply a case of different conventions.

I think he is BSing me to avoid admitting that his written English leaves a lot to be desired.

In case I'm being too cocky here, please tell me - is this, or was this ever an accepted headline writing convention in the US press?Martha, whoever this is that you're working with, he's wrong, because these headlines are incorrect regarding agency. And not only is he wrong, but he's an idiot for saying that these were "US-style" constuctions. First of all, this isn't a matter of construction. Secondly, good English uses the passive voice whenever it's necessary or advisable.

If an unidentified person attacks the mayor in a deli, you say: "Mayor Attacked in Delicatessen." You DON'T say: "Someone Attacked the Mayor in a Delicatessen," at least not for a headline. The reason is obvious: the mayor is presumably more important/more well-known than the anonymous attacker.

OTOH, if George W. Bush attacked a member of the press corps in a deli, you might say: "Bush Attacks Foreign Correpesponent in Delicatessen," or something like that.

You are not being too cocky, Martha, not at all. This guy should be fired. His headlines are not just bad jouralism; they're simply not English--they're not grammatical. And if they do fire him, I'd gladly take his place. Consider me a candidate for his position.

[Martha Medea]

This headline style does appear to be a convention in the national Spanish language press, so that goes some way to explain it, especially as this editor advocates the use of online translators to produce English versions of local Spanish news items, which is a problem in itself.

"Insisten en parar transporte" for example, is a headline in one of today's national newspapers. "(Unions) insist on stopping transport" is the literal translation. I don't think this is as bad in Spanish as it is in English, because Spanish drops the subject noun or pronoun which is implied in the verb: "Voy al parque" = "(I) go to the park" without it sounding like an imperative.

[aldiboronti]

I've just dug up the posting on this topic I made to Word Origins forum (http://p211.ezboard.com/fwordoriginsorgfrm15.showMessage?topicID=405.topic) a couple of years ago which gives examples of the headline style in Chicago newspapers of the 1920s.



An excerpt from St Valentine's Day Massacre by Helmer & Bilek, a particularly well-researched account:

"(Dean (or Dion) O'Banion, North Side leader, has been gunned down in his flower-shop by imported NY hood Frankie Yale and a couple of other gunsels).

The next morning's Tribune banner blared in the declarative style of the day: KILL O'BANION, GANG LEADER."

There's also a photographic reproduction of that particular edition's front page, which makes it clear that there is no text, small or otherwise, above the banner, or previous banner which might have provided a subject, such as GUNMEN STRIKE IN BROAD DAYLIGHT or something.

Also, there are other photographic reproductions in the book which show that the former was not an isolated eccentricity of grammar:

KILL LOMBARDO, MAFIA CHIEF

SEIZE McGURN FOR MASSACRE

[aldiboronti]

I'll add two relevant replies to my WordOrigins query mentioned above.

From language hat:

"Nothing to decipher; KILL O'BANION, GANG LEADER is the precise equivalent of O'BANION, GANG LEADER, KILLED but two letters shorter, which is the equivalent of two bags of gold in the eternally straitened economy of headline space. The active-for-passive style has gone out of fashion for reasons unclear to me, which is why it looks strange to you, but it was once perfectly normal."

From Dr Techie:

"I've seen it in contemporary use in a minor midwestern newspaper, as recently as--well, actually, that was about 20 years ago. As LH says, it's gone out of fashion, I would guess because the false imperative sense that it created led to too much unintentional hilarity. I still recall one along the lines of "FONDLE CHEERLEADERS ON BUS".

I always took it that there was an implied subject consisting of 'Some person or persons...'."

[SmackFu]

You will sometimes see this kind of structure as a sub-head. The noun is implied from the headline, so they leave it out of the second, smaller line.

[Ellis Aponte Jr.]

For those of you who still insist this construction is "wrong," "bad grammar," "not U.S. usage," or unknown since the 1950s, here are three more from the Daily News...

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/nydailynews/access/807818441.html?dids=807818441:807818441&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Mar+15%2C+2005&author=&pub=New+York+Daily+News&edition=&startpage=8&desc=COLLAR+DRIVER+IN+FATAL+HIT-RUN

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/nydailynews/access/771773811.html?dids=771773811:771773811&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Dec+29%2C+2004&author=LAURA+WILLIAMS+and+CARRIE+MELAGO+DAILY+NEWS+STAFF+WRITERS&pub=New+York+Daily+News&edition=&startpage=1&desc=ARREST+GIRL+IN+SLAYING

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/nydailynews/access/572091741.html?dids=572091741:572091741&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Mar+5%2C+2004&author=MICHELE+MCPHEE+AND+LEO+STANDORA&pub=New+York+Daily+News&edition=&startpage=6&desc=FINGERS+PTA+BOARD+IN+NAIL+RAP

None of these are subheadings - these are the headlines. If the editor mentioned in the OP should happen to get fired he may want to try for a job at the Daily News.

[BJMoose]

When I did my stint on a copy desk, that's exactly how we got headlines. We were basically given a count of how many lines and a point count (I'm not exactly sure whether it was called a point count or something else). Our little green screened terminals (anybody remember the names of these?) would give you a count, and IIRC, our headlines would have to be with +-2 of the specified count.
This, folks, is how "counting" a headline works, or worked. The points in question were not the printer's unit of measure (one point=1/72 of an inch) but "points" assigned to characters on the basis of their width (skinny letters and spaces were 1/2, most lowercase letter were 1, wide lowercase letters like m and w and most uppercase were 1 1/2, cap M and W 2; or something like that). The editor would say something like "Gimme me a 30-point head" and you'd have to come up with some combination of letters that added up to 29 or 30 ("short" headlines were verboten).

Thus (to use a previous example) the reason for using the head "Two Men Murdered" instead of "Two Murdered" might be that the copyeditor need the 4 1/2 points provided by "Men" to fill out the line. Headline writing is the perfect occupation for the chronically anal.

Some papers used to use multi-line heads with different stylistic rules governing them; all lines had to be exactly the right length for the styles to work. In my college editing class we presumed that the poor slobs who had to crank out a dozen of those suckers every day probably committed suicide after a couple of years. . . .

[groman]

For those of you who still insist this construction is "wrong," "bad grammar," "not U.S. usage," or unknown since the 1950s, here are three more from the Daily News...


Well I believe you now on US usage and not being technically wrong, but I will stand by it being bad grammar.

Consider
"COLLAR DRIVER IN FATAL HIT-RUN" (To me this is a shortened version of "Now you can collar your own driver in fatal hit'n'run accidents")
vs.
"FATAL HIT-RUN DRIVER COLLARED"
"MAN ARRESTED IN FATAL HIT-RUN"

"ARREST GIRL IN SLAYING" (To me this is a shortened version of "Now you can arrest your own girls in slayings")
vs.
"ARREST MADE IN SLAYING"
"SLAYING: GIRL ARRESTED" (meh)
"NEW ARREST IN SLAYING"

"FINGERS PTA BOARD IN NAIL RAP" (Note I don't even understand what this means, as in, the PTA BOARD either got nailed or fingered, but not both in the same headline using that structure)
"PTA BOARD IMPLICATED"
"PTA BOARD NAILED"
or if it means what I think it doesn't mean:
"PTA BOARD IMPLICATES MEMBER"
"PTA BOARD NAILS MEMBER"
"DEBIT CARD FRAUDSTER SQUEALS"


There is simply no excuse for using a headline that uses the imperative without providing the means for acting out said imperative. Of course if this structure was not already used for something more mainstream, it would be OK because it would not ever result in ambiguity. However, this same grammatical form is already used in magazine headlines with a completely different meaning:

Old Cosmo (http://www.spytechagency.com/images/Cosmo9804.jpg)


GET ANY MAN YOU WANT
SWEEP MESS AND STRESS OUT OF YOUR LIFE

Old Men's Fitness (http://www.amagarea.com/imgB/BTCHUXICTHH.jpg)

MUSCLE UP, PRONTO!
LOSE FAT WITH GREEN TEA!


Now 99 out of 100 times there is no ambiguity but that doesn't make it an acceptable practice anymore for newspapers to use it imperative that way.

[Ellis Aponte Jr.]

groman,

It's strange to end up in a position of defending a form of usage I already consider weird, but I don't think this... shall we call it tabloid form?... is as bad as you say.

Mind you I'm no grammarian, but the verb forms from those headlines are not imperatives simply because they sometimes coincide with the imperative form. Context makes clear that they are third-person verb forms with their subject omitted.

In the case of FINGERS PTA BOARD IN NAIL RAP, "fingers" doesn't even coincide with any imperative form. Why any reader would be confused by any of these headlines I can't see - after all tabloid newspapers are not in the business of using their headlines to tell people things to do (except maybe to buy lotto tickets).

Why would the Post or the Daily News follow the style of Cosmopolitan or Men's Fitness? The Post & the Daily News are many years older than those magazines. I'm sure circulation figures within the city greatly favor the newspapers as well.

Just to take one of your rewritten headlines...

the Daily News says: COLLARS DRIVER IN FATAL HIT-RUN
you say: FATAL HIT-RUN DRIVER COLLARED

I don't see the first one as inferior. "Fatal Hit-Run Driver" reads slightly awkward to me. I realize this is all subjective, but I would assume that tabloid readers are used to what they're used to and none of this bothers them.

[pulykamell]

groman,
Mind you I'm no grammarian, but the verb forms from those headlines are not imperatives simply because they sometimes coincide with the imperative form. Context makes clear that they are third-person verb forms with their subject omitted.

In the case of FINGERS PTA BOARD IN NAIL RAP, "fingers" doesn't even coincide with any imperative form. Why any reader would be confused by any of these headlines I can't see

The reason people are complaining is because it's a wholly unnatural construction for pretty much everyone except New York tabloid readers, it seems. Abbreviated noun-verb-object forms are unobjectionable because they simply make sense. If I saw the headline "FINGERS PTA BOARD IN NAIL RAP" in my newspaper, I honestly would have no clue what it meant if I had never read this thread. And I still stumble over it, because I cannot understand how anybody would have decided third-person present-subject-object (noun phrase, whatever) makes any sense whatsoever. To me (and apparently most of the readers of this thread), it looks like a jumbled headline.

Likewise, I think "COLLARS DRIVER IN FATAL HIT RUN" is vastly inferior to "DRIVER COLLARED IN FATAL HIT-RUN" or "FATAL HIT-RUN DRIVER COLLARED." I would guess--and I've been wrong before as evidenced by this thread--that if you took the three headlines to a broad cross-section of American readers, a vast majority would mark the first as confusing or ungrammatical.

[guizot]

GET ANY MAN YOU WANT
SWEEP MESS AND STRESS OUT OF YOUR LIFE
Sorry, groman, that can't be a real "Cosmo" cover, because there isn't a headline about "sex secrets." Every "Cosmo" I've ever seen has an article about the latest sex secrets to come out.The reason people are complaining is because it's a wholly unnatural construction for pretty much everyone except New York tabloid readers, it seems.Exactly. I suppose it could be regional. Whatever it is, it should be stopped, because those headlines aren't meaningful. That editor should indeed go to work at the Daily News, and he should stay there.

[Acsenray]

We were basically given a count of how many lines and a point count (I'm not exactly sure whether it was called a point count or something else).

Headline count.

Our little green screened terminals (anybody remember the names of these?)

I have used CompuGraphic, DiscNet, and Atex. I believe these were all common.

And I'm still scratching my head over "SLAY RAP IN 1974 SHOOTING". What does that mean????

My WAG:

"Slay(ing)" = killing

"Rap" = blame

So,

"Slay rap" = culpability for murder

So, the headline is saying that (Someone) is being blamed for a shooting and killing someone in 1974.

[Ellis Aponte Jr.]

The reason people are complaining is because it's a wholly unnatural construction for pretty much everyone except New York tabloid readers, it seems. Abbreviated noun-verb-object forms are unobjectionable because they simply make sense. If I saw the headline "FINGERS PTA BOARD IN NAIL RAP" in my newspaper, I honestly would have no clue what it meant if I had never read this thread. And I still stumble over it, because I cannot understand how anybody would have decided third-person present-subject-object (noun phrase, whatever) makes any sense whatsoever. To me (and apparently most of the readers of this thread), it looks like a jumbled headline.


pulykamell,
If your local paper this morning carried the headline BEARS WIN CHAMPIONSHIP would you be confused? Would you think it was an imperative statement urging the team to win? Of course not. Well this headline is grammatically identical to FINGERS PTA BOARD with the exception of the omission of the subject in the latter. (I've left out the NAIL RAP part - even I don't know what that means). All of the fuss about these unusual headlines boils down to the fact that they omit the subject, leaving it implied. Furthermore, the implied subject is almost always "police" or "citizen" so it's hardly a difficult thing to figure out. As the OP pointed out a while back, this is standard practice in Spanish-language newspapers and it doesn't make Spanish headlines less "meaningful." Present tense for past event is common practice in headlines (BEARS WIN CHAMPIONSHIP; MAN BITES DOG) and in speech ("So then I say to the guy...). So that can't be the problem. All headline style is a contrived version of English. Conventions fluctuate, but you get used them. The "tabloid form" may be a regional practice now, but it wasn't always, as the headlines from Chicago and Detroit indicate. And hey "Hollywood dingbat," have you ever read the headlines in Variety? They must make you apoplectic.

[Martha Medea]

Business as usual this morning: "Inaugurate bridge in east region" - not only did I do that story over the weekend and headlined it correctly, the individual who inaugurated the bridge in question is the president, so leaving that out of the headline makes even less sense!

[pulykamell]

pulykamell,
If your local paper this morning carried the headline BEARS WIN CHAMPIONSHIP would you be confused? Would you think it was an imperative statement urging the team to win? Of course not.

Of course not is right. BEARS, WIN CHAMPIONSHIP would be the imperitive


Well this headline is grammatically identical to FINGERS PTA BOARD with the exception of the omission of the subject in the latter.

And that's a BIG omission that I and almost everyone else here objects to. We are simply not used to seeing or hearing the third-person verb heading a sentence without a subject.

They are not analogous examples.

[aldiboronti]

Of course not is right. BEARS, WIN CHAMPIONSHIP would be the imperitive



And that's a BIG omission that I and almost everyone else here objects to. We are simply not used to seeing or hearing the third-person verb heading a sentence without a subject.

They are not analogous examples.

That almost everyone here objects to it is neither here nor there. The fact remains that this declarative style of newspaper headline both existed in the past (as shown by the 1920s Chicago press headlines) and remains currently in usage (witness the NY examples). It's simply another means of saving precious space and is no more wrong than any other form of newspaper telegraphese.

[pulykamell]

That almost everyone here objects to it is neither here nor there. The fact remains that this declarative style of newspaper headline both existed in the past (as shown by the 1920s Chicago press headlines) and remains currently in usage (witness the NY examples). It's simply another means of saving precious space and is no more wrong than any other form of newspaper telegraphese.

That's your opinion. I would beg to differ. Language changes and people's expectations change. The examples may not be "wrong" for readers of the New York Daily News, but for readers of most newspapers around the country, they would be sufficiently confusing enough (as evidenced by nearly everyone in this thread) that a good editor would avoid them. A newspaper's job is to communicate information clearly and if headline conventions change over time a good newspaper should abide by those changes. If a headline is causing intelligent readers to stop in their tracks and think "WTF is this?" then I suggest rewriting the headline, unless you live in 1920 or present day New York.

That everyone objects is not "neither here nor there." It is the very foundation of how communication and language works.

[pulykamell]

Let me put it to you this way:

Hypothetically, I am the editor of a national newspaper. I decide to start running 1920s and New York Daily News-style headlines that read "SLAY COP KILLER" and "FINGERS PTA BOARD" instead of "cop killer slayed" and "PTA board fingered" or (preferably) something more informative and punchy. I then ask my readership about these headlines and get responses similar to what's been posted here on the Dope. Almost everyone except for a few NYC locals and perhaps newspaper historians object to the construction.

Now, do I tell my readers that they're wrong, "look, by golly, it's good enough for the 1920s and NYC tabloids, it's good enough for you!" or do I rewrite the headlines and stick with the more well-understood headlines that cause no problems for anybody?

It's not friggin rocket science to rewrite a headline, so why cause readers outside the NYC tabloid market headaches by running them? In the interests of clarity, go with the less awkward and more universally understood construction.

[Ellis Aponte Jr.]

Why is it necessary to stamp out any form of marginal quirkiness? I don't endorse this stuff for a national newspaper... it's you and likeminded posters who want to banish it from publication anywhere.

We are simply not used to seeing or hearing the third-person verb heading a sentence without a subject.

Sucks, then.

[pulykamell]

Why is it necessary to stamp out any form of marginal quirkiness? I don't endorse this stuff for a national newspaper...

After being presented with the facts that the New York Daily news does do headlines this way as a matter of style or quirk, did I say anywhere not to allow it with New York newspapers where the readers apparently are familiar with the convention? I don't even know how you got that impression, especially since I specifically stated:


If a headline is causing intelligent readers to stop in their tracks and think "WTF is this?" then I suggest rewriting the headline, unless you live in 1920 or present day New York.



Did you perhaps think that's why, in my example, I specifically said "I am the editor of a national newspaper"?


it's you and likeminded posters who want to banish it from publication anywhere.


Thanks for putting words in my mouth. That's exactly what I said. :rolleyes:

[pulykamell]

I don't endorse this stuff for a national newspaper...

Also, remember that the OP is talking about a Latin-American publication that has, presumably, a wide swath of English readers, most who probably would not be familiar with NYC tabloid headlinese. With your statement, you are basically agreeing with the majority of what has been said in this thread.

[guizot]

pulykamell,
If your local paper this morning carried the headline BEARS WIN CHAMPIONSHIP would you be confused? Would you think it was an imperative statement urging the team to win? Of course not. Well this headline is grammatically identical to FINGERS PTA BOARD with the exception of the omission of the subject in the latter. (I've left out the NAIL RAP part - even I don't know what that means). All of the fuss about these unusual headlines boils down to the fact that they omit the subject, leaving it implied. Furthermore, the implied subject is almost always "police" or "citizen" so it's hardly a difficult thing to figure out. As the OP pointed out a while back, this is standard practice in Spanish-language newspapers and it doesn't make Spanish headlines less "meaningful." Present tense for past event is common practice in headlines (BEARS WIN CHAMPIONSHIP; MAN BITES DOG) and in speech ("So then I say to the guy...). So that can't be the problem. All headline style is a contrived version of English. Conventions fluctuate, but you get used them. The "tabloid form" may be a regional practice now, but it wasn't always, as the headlines from Chicago and Detroit indicate. And hey "Hollywood dingbat," have you ever read the headlines in Variety? They must make you apoplectic.For the first time in my life I've just read Variety, and this is what I've found, in the TV section headlines:

Top Stories:
Producers pick 'Sunshine'
"Little Miss Sunshine" is beaming.
DirecTV, CBS ink on hoops
CSTV to be offered to over 8 mil subscribers
CBS, Fox score big with football finals
Fox Sunday game is best in 10 years
Woodruff back at PBS
Anchor left 'NewsHour' in '93 to join CNN
Liguori looking over shoulder
Fox boss says FCC decisions 'chilling'
Inside Move: Reilly cameos on 'Office'
NBC boss gets airtime on hit comedy
'Sopranos' sees ratings dip on A&E
'Idol' takes over 9-o'clock time period
Colbert-O'Reilly crossover scores
Both hosts' shows see ratings boost
De Mol scotches Disney rumors
Dutch mogul denies pair will bid for Endemol
Variety staff seen, heard on Reelz
Paper to provide content for 'Dailies'
Star India chiefs resign
Aiello named as acting CEO
'Crowned' heads to CW
Net orders episodes of pageant-style contest
'Ugly Betty' gets big Kiwi welcome
Premiere tops ratings in New Zealand
BSkyB dismisses Murdoch rumors
Reports claim Mockridge will take reins in U.K.
Versus climbs into cage
Sports network pacts with WEC
BBC sets to expand

World Brief
Channel 4 board to quiz Duncan
Broadcaster criticized for 'Big Brother' coverage'
MOMI lauds Lauer, Lee
Black-tie salute to be held April 26
ABC picks up 'Suspect'
Fox leads 'Apostles' with cop drama
Mogul Gonzalez buys 80% of Canal 9
Exec takes stake of Argentine broadcasterEvery one of these headlines has a subject. I've also gone through today's NY and LA Times and found the same thing.

I don't read the New York Daily News, so perhaps this is a tradition of that paper, and maybe a few others. The fact that Spanish allows for dropped subjects doesn't make this a helpful practice to reduce the length of English news headlines. Spanish-language news headlines follow completely different conventions. But even in Spanish-language papers, if the agency is important, it's communicated. In English, most papers will use passive constructions when the agency is either not known or unimportant.

And BTW, do you know how few people who actually live in Hollywood actually read Variety? Probably about three. I guess I now make it four.

[guizot]

I've also gone through today's NY and LA Times and found the same thing.Okay, in Todays LA Times, this:Saving the ER for real emergencies

Costly 'frequent fliers' are being encouraged to visit clinics in L.A. test.In this case, I think they're doing what the NY Daily News does, but using a gerund rather than base form or conjugated verb. This usage refers to something that has been happening repeatedly for a while, rather than one event.

[Musicat]

And BTW, do you know how few people who actually live in Hollywood actually read Variety? Probably about three. I guess I now make it four.If you are in "the industry" you read Variety more than the Times. Outside the industry, you couldn't care less.

[groman]

Okay, in Todays LA Times, this:In this case, I think they're doing what the NY Daily News does, but using a gerund rather than base form or conjugated verb. This usage refers to something that has been happening repeatedly for a while, rather than one event.

There is a distinct difference between imperative and gerund.


"Saving the ER for real emergencies" - a headline which, to me, implies an article about measures being taken to prevent frivolous ER use.

"Save the ER for real emergencies" - a possible headline which, to me, implies an article that is probably an opinion piece urging readers to avoid frivolous ER use.

[Bambi Hassenpfeffer]

This headline style does appear to be a convention in the national Spanish language press, so that goes some way to explain it, especially as this editor advocates the use of online translators to produce English versions of local Spanish news items, which is a problem in itself.

"Insisten en parar transporte" for example, is a headline in one of today's national newspapers. "(Unions) insist on stopping transport" is the literal translation. I don't think this is as bad in Spanish as it is in English, because Spanish drops the subject noun or pronoun which is implied in the verb: "Voy al parque" = "(I) go to the park" without it sounding like an imperative.
I was going to say, before I even finished the OP, that these headlines sound like they were written by Spanish speakers who learned English as a second language. It's like some bizarre mash-up of English and Spanish headline convention. In English, I have never seen the construction and agree fully with the other mystified English speakers.

[commasense]

As a journalist and headline writer, I think the examples from the NYC tabloids are little more than matters of style. They have created a distinctive way of writing headlines that saves space and that their readers, over time, have come to understand, even expect.

I'd like to mention a point that everyone else here seems to have missed about virtually all of the tabloid examples presented above: the absent subject of the sentence is almost always either the police or some other entity to whom the verb applies almost exclusively. For instance, the police are the only ones who arrest, bust, or nab (a criminal). So what appears on its face to be an imperative is understood by tabloid readers to be a declarative statement with an understood subject that 95% of the time will be the police. The rest of the time it will be the government or one of a small number of other candidates that the verb narrows to near exclusivity.

Under this style, I wouldn't expect a headline like: SLAY BAD SPELLER, instead of BAD SPELLER SLAIN, since there's no telling who might commit such a crime. (There must be at least a dozen suspects in this thread alone, and I don't exclude myself.) The "understood" missing subject can't be understood.

In this sense, this unusual usage is much like the special Variety speak (http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=slanguage) that that publication has developed over the years: e.g. prexy for president, ankling for leaving a job, helmer for director, etc. It's perplexing to the uninitiated, but it's useful shorthand that saves space and establishes a style distinctive to the publication. (Variety uses this jargon throughout its copy, not just in headlines.)

Now if the headline writers of the OP's publication are studiously applying these principles (which seems possible from the examples in the OP), I might say they are simply adopting a style. But if these headlines are in fact the product of a poor understanding of English (which seems more likely from the OP's later posts), the writers should be corrected.

[pulykamell]

One of my favorite papers, the Oregonian, has an interesting blog entry on the art of writing good headlines. (http://oregonianeditors.blogs.oregonlive.com/default.asp?mode=blog&page=18)

I'd be curious what they would think of our examples, especially since they object to even rather mildly annoying headlines:


A few decades ago, you might have read headlines that appeared to have been written in some foreign dialect. Here are a few that actually appeared:

BPA MULLS N-PLANT PROPOSAL
ITALIAN SOLONS OK BASING OF U.S. JETS
BEAVERTON BOYS, GIRLS THINCLADS THRASH CRUSADERS, ST. MARY'S

Today, headline writers on our news, sports and features copy desks try for engaging, conversational, everyday language. For a news story, the headline should convey the key points. On feature articles or columns, the headline might intrigue or tease the reader into the story.

[Ellis Aponte Jr.]

One of my favorite papers, the Oregonian, has an interesting blog entry on the art of writing good headlines. (http://oregonianeditors.blogs.oregonlive.com/default.asp?mode=blog&page=18)

I'd be curious what they would think of our examples, especially since they object to even rather mildly annoying headlines:

I've got news for you. People in New York City don't give a shit what people from Oregon think.

[pulykamell]

I've got news for you. People in New York City don't give a shit what people from Oregon think.

Why so hostile, Ellis? I am completely mystified by your attitude. My comment above had nothing to do with New York City, yet you seem to be taking it personally or something.

This thread is NOT about New York City or what goes on there or what New Yorkers think. This is a general thread on the art of headline writing.

[Musicat]

One of my favorite papers, the Oregonian, has an interesting blog entry on the art of writing good headlines. (http://oregonianeditors.blogs.oregonlive.com/default.asp?mode=blog&page=18)
From that blog, an example of a clever headline that I like:A 90 million-year-old tick recently found in New Jersey has entomologists scratching their heads.

... received this headline:

Tick spends 90 million years in
New Jersey; scientists ask why

[guizot]

If you are in "the industry" you read Variety more than the Times. Outside the industry, you couldn't care less.And if you're "in the industry," you probably don't live in Hollywood. You probably live in The Valley.

[guizot]

There is a distinct difference between imperative and gerund.


"Saving the ER for real emergencies" - a headline which, to me, implies an article about measures being taken to prevent frivolous ER use.

"Save the ER for real emergencies" - a possible headline which, to me, implies an article that is probably an opinion piece urging readers to avoid frivolous ER use.Well, yeah, that was my point. There's no subject, but the verb save becomes a gerund.

[Acsenray]

And if you're "in the industry," you probably don't live in Hollywood. You probably live in The Valley.

This is a nitpick, right? It is standard American journalistic convention to refer to the movie and television industry as "Hollywood" regardless of the actual municipal boundaries within which their activities take place.

For example, the Associated Press Stylebook says --

Hollywood Stands alone in datelines when used instead of Los Angeles on storiesa bout films and the film industry.

In other words, "Hollywood" more commonly means "the movie industry in southern California" than "the neighborhood of Los Angeles centering on Hollywood Boulevard and Interstate 101."

[gonzomax]

Sometimes they come out just plain wrong. In the Det. Free press a couple years ago there was an article about a new school principal in a Det. school. His mission was to clean up and paint up the old schooll to make it more inviting.
He was a black and they showed his picture.
The headline said School Has a New Shine. Just not right.

[groman]

Why so hostile, Ellis? I am completely mystified by your attitude. My comment above had nothing to do with New York City, yet you seem to be taking it personally or something.

I am not sure if that's tongue in cheek or not but if it isn't I assume you have not met that many New Yorkers. Hell, I've never been east of the rockies and I know better.

[Polycarp]

Well, yeah, that was my point. There's no subject, but the verb save becomes a gerund.

Not to nitpick too interminably, but the Hell it's a gerund; it's an imperative mode verb which does not require a subject and in fact refuses to take one.

Let not your heart be troubled. Cast your grammatical errors on the waters. Take no thought for nitpickers. Go thou, and do likewise.

[pulykamell]

I am not sure if that's tongue in cheek or not but if it isn't I assume you have not met that many New Yorkers. Hell, I've never been east of the rockies and I know better.

No, not really tongue-in-cheek. I do know many New Yorkers (including having worked with two who now report for the New York Post) and have been there several times, and most don't conform to the New-York-is-the-center-of-the-universe stereotype. That's why I'm a little mystified--it's as if I've wounded Ellis's civic pride or something, when I'm not even talking about his city, in fact, taking great pains in my posts to clearly indicate I'm not telling New Yorkers how to run their papers, yet my posts are misrepresented and somehow I'm being accused of trying to stamp our "marginal quirks." Talk about a straw man and a little bit of a martyr complex.

[pulykamell]

Well, yeah, that was my point. There's no subject, but the verb save becomes a gerund.

Well, as Polcarp said, that doesn't quite work. Other than the fact that gerunds in English all end in "-ing," you'd have to show how the verb "save" functions as a noun in that sentence. It doesn't. It's a verb instructing the reader to save. The implied subject is "you," which is the standard construction for imperatives in English.

[Ellis Aponte Jr.]

pulykamell,

Sorry for my snippiness. That was uncalled for. Maybe you're right, I'm unnecessarily defensive about this. I know the topic is not all about New York City, but it sort of shaped up like that because all of the current cites were from NYC papers... leading to what I perceived as a "let's all please stop this awful practice from spreading outside NYC" kind of stance. I guess it's as if, say, you speak with a southern accent, move elsewhere and then have locals try to "correct" your speech.
I value your contributions to this thread and I don't want to halt the free inquiry going on.

[Ellis Aponte Jr.]

I should mention that I'm not even originally from New York, so the stereotyping is pointless (don't mean you, pulykamell).

My concern here is the question of who sets the standards for whom. I don't think Oregonians should care about "how New Yorkers do it" any more than vice versa (btw, I realize now that the link to the Oregonian was thrown out only as a point of discussion). I believe matters of style can be decided on more of a localized, case-by-case basis and don't need to be prescribed universally. If it's a Latin American publication for an international readership should a one-size-fits-all kind of English be used, or should we allow the editor to go his own way with a format that just happens to relate to the standard Latin American format? I don't know. I don't take a position on the OP's problem. I merely wanted to stress that the format the editor is using is not flat-out wrong and is in fact a viable choice.

[Punoqllads]

If by "viable" you mean, "confusing to most English speakers" then yes, it's viable.

Getting back to the OP:
[the editor said] it was a US-style construction, commonly used in US tabloid headlines
...the answer is no, it's not commonly used in US tabloid headlines.

[Ellis Aponte Jr.]

If by "viable" you mean, "confusing to most English speakers" then yes, it's viable.

Getting back to the OP:

...the answer is no, it's not commonly used in US tabloid headlines.

It is commonly used in the headlines of the number one and the number two most widely read tabloid newspapers in the US, the New York Post and the New York Daily News.

[Punoqllads]

It is commonly used in the headlines of the number one and the number two most widely read tabloid newspapers in the US, the New York Post and the New York Daily News.
If by "commonly" you mean "rarely", then yes, it is "commonly" used by them.

[sugar and spice]

Wow. Who woulda thought a simple headline GQ would span 2 pages and 96 passionately argued posts? Only at the Dope. :)

[pulykamell]

^^^Yipes, that post was me.

[waterj2]

It's not just New York. Check out the Detroit News:

http://www.rarenewspapers.com/viewissue.aspx?ID=216276
By some odd coincidence, the thread directly below this one when I read it has more information about the event this newspaper refers to. http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=405273

[guizot]

It is standard American journalistic convention to refer to the movie and television industry as "Hollywood" regardless of the actual municipal boundaries within which their activities take place.

For example, the Associated Press Stylebook says --

In other words, "Hollywood" more commonly means "the movie industry in southern California" than "the neighborhood of Los Angeles centering on Hollywood Boulevard and Interstate 101."

Yes, yes, yes, of course I know that “Hollywood” is a metonym. :rolleyes: (In fact, I think I once started a thread here about places becoming metonyms.) But it’s also a place.

Let’s review:

1. I said OP’s co-worker was misguided.
2. Ellis Aponte Jr. disagreed, apparently wanted to address my comment by referring to my location (“in a Hollywood dingbat”) as an appellation—even though it is, in fact, a place, not a name—and made the assumption that I read Variety.
3. I responded by citing some Variety headlines, and then added:And BTW, do you know how few people who actually live in Hollywood actually read Variety? Probably about three. I guess I now make it four.Note the word "live." Note the preposition "in." Note the adverb "actually." Clearly I was not talking about the metonym "Hollywood." I was talking about the place.
4. You entered the discussion and responded to me by making the same erroneous assumption that Ellis Aponte Jr. had made, saying:If you are in "the industry" you read Variety more than the Times. Outside the industry, you couldn't care less.
5. I respond to you by saying:And if you're "in the industry," you probably don't live in Hollywood. You probably live in The Valley.Maybe you didn't get the joke.
6. And now, after I’ve asserted twice that I’m not talking about the metonym “Hollywood,” but the actual place, you ask if I’m “nitpicking”? :dubious:

I guess subtlety is a dying species.

So I’ll say it in simple terms: Few people who work “in the industry” actually LIVE in the PLACE, the LOCATION, the GEOGRAPHICAL ENTITY known as “Hollywood,” a district of the City of Los Angeles (which is in Southern California), roughly considered to the area bounded by Fairfax on the west, Vermont on the East, Melrose on the south, and the hills on the north, and which excludes, by conventional usage, of course, the city of West Hollywood, a separately incorporated municipality.

And don’t even try to bring up North Hollywood.

Is that clear enough?

And when I say “few,” I mean too few for someone to reasonably assume that any given person who lives in Hollywood must read Variety (or works in “the industry”).

Sorry for the highjack, but it’s intended to keep this thread from going even further all over the place.

[guizot]

Not to nitpick too interminably, but the Hell it's a gerund; it's an imperative mode verb which does not require a subject and in fact refuses to take one.

Let not your heart be troubled. Cast your grammatical errors on the waters. Take no thought for nitpickers. Go thou, and do likewise.Let me get this straight: "Saving Private Ryan," for example, is not the use of a gerund? It's imperative? Who taught you grammar?

[pulykamell]

Let me get this straight: "Saving Private Ryan," for example, is not the use of a gerund? It's imperative? Who taught you grammar?

I believe the confusion lies in the fact that both me and Polycarp thought you were saying "save" is a gerund in "save the ER for real emergencies." At least that's what I thought you were saying.

[Acsenray]

Okay, guizot, but you misattributed this quote to me --

If you are in "the industry" you read Variety more than the Times. Outside the industry, you couldn't care less.

Musicat said that.

[guizot]

I believe the confusion lies in the fact that both me and Polycarp thought you were saying "save" is a gerund in "save the ER for real emergencies." At least that's what I thought you were saying.I see. I apologize. The way I view gerunds is that it's a way to make a verb function as a noun. You put the -ing on a verb and it can function as a subject or an object, so every gerund orginates from a verb. I pointed it out to demonstrate that if you want to use a verb in a headline without a subject for the verb, the typical way to do it is to make that verb into noun (as a gerund). The headline "Saving E.R. Rooms" etc. focuses on the action, rather than the agent of the action, as opposed to the marked, idiosycratic VERB + PEDICATE way of the New York Daily News.

Musicat said that.Very sorry, again. Sloppy posting on my part.