Here's 1 reason why I won't read your drivel

We applied some good ole American capitalism to our buisiness and now have this majestic outcome.

 

I use the "three things we learned" or "takeaways" or whatever as my quick online version from college basketball gamers. (Our football beat guy does the same.) This gives us an online presence to take advantage of a window of online traffic immediately after the game. Then I'm also writing a bigger "mainbar" piece. Which one runs in print depends on the time of the game.

I believe it's easier to compile a running gamer that way, especially if it's a non-conference buy game or some other blowout. It's also probably easier for the reader to digest, especially if things go down to the wire. In the past I've made exceptions for postseason or big regular season games with late starts. Still deciding how I'll approach that this season.

Otherwise I try to avoid those contrivances, mostly because I think they are the opposite of click bait. Readers see them so often they ignore them. You also miss a chance to get more keywords in your headline for SEO, etc.

 

A bunch of people here are crying over clickbait and listacle headlines.

Meanwhile, NYT published a TL;DR version of the Trump tax story, and people (not here) are showering the move with praise. I don't get it.

 

It's almost as if your company trained it's employees to write headlines with gaps in curiosity to get people to read the stories, and did so during a large-scale reorganization when there was a sense everyone's job was on the line.

(Is the maddening part that people writing for online don't write print headlines? Or that a lot of folks at the design center don't care to change them)

 

Many times, it's also an order from up above. Want to keep your job? Do what they say. You really think reporters like doing this stuff?

 

10? But good point!

 

DEFENSIVE COORDINATORS HATE HIM!

 

What's amazing to me is that in an industry where it's almost impossible to get a large number of people to do something consistently, THIS is the one thing that EVERYBODY is completely on board with. We do 29 papers, and every one I come across has headlines written in the same tone.

It's maddening that a lot of folks at the publishing center don't change them. Almost all online headlines come in too long for print, but too many times the publishing center simply notes out words in the online head until it does fit.

 

I may be the minority here, since I (have to) do this occasionally, if there is good information beyond the "five things/takeaways," I'm fine with it. The pageview dilemma is above my pay grade. And if people like clicking on information that is easier to digest with demands on their time ...

 

5 things is essentially the same thing as a notebook in my opinion, only it's packaged slightly differently. It's a way to get added information into the paper that didn't fit into the regular gamer.

 

What I find curious about "listicles" is that they seem to have become the rage about the same time everyone started touting their commitment to "longform." I'm guessing part of it is that you want to let the reader know they will either have to buckle in or that this won't take too long.

 

Let's say the first "takeaway" is the starting QB should be benched.

Wouldn't "State U. QB should be benched" be a better headline and garner more interest . . . and not just because it tells you SOMETHING.