My morning routine is simple. My alarm goes off at 0600. I go to the kitchen and begin getting breakfast ready. Most mornings I will turn the TV on but keep the sound muted so as to not disturb those who may still be asleep.
This morning when I powered up the TV, it was tuned to CNN. Remember at this point the sound was muted. The announcer was intently engaged in reporting something that must have happened overnight. Then, with the sound still muted, I noticed the following banner headline at the bottom of the screen:
“Ex-cop accused of killing mom, grandparents of teen he met online.”
Okay, maybe that was a significant story, but let’s take a closer look at the headline. It is composed of three elements.
First, it states that two grandparents and a mother were killed. Second, it notes the alleged perpetrator had met the daughter/granddaughter online.
Okay, so far so good. But the third element of the headline was troubling. The alleged perpetrator was an “ex-cop.” No doubt that had to have been factual. CNN would not fabricate such a statement. But why put that phrase in the headline?
The producers, or whoever decides what headline to apply to a given news story, made a choice. They chose to highlight the fact that the alleged perpetrator was a former police officer. Not a serving police officer but a former police officer. An “ex-cop.”
To be fair, I did not listen to the newscaster’s commentary. It is possible that the former police officer had undergone training as a recruit that had taught him how to kill moms and grandparents of a teen that he had met online. Maybe not.
If not, why did CNN choose to construct such a clearly inflammatory headline? Did they choose to put sensationalism ahead of objective reporting. Maybe.
Recently CNN has repeatedly heralded the notion that America is a nation divided. Does CNN’s management not understand that the words they choose when presenting the news might contribute to the pulse of the country?
Words matter. Choose your words carefully. Choices have consequences.