Headlines

I really liked the 'Best Headlines of the Year' list. I mean I was reading through them and laughing but I know that it is easy to produce a headline like those. It's easy to simply read the headline you wrote a different way than someone else, or in a different context. Syntax is so essential in headlines. We try to write in the active voice and we try to write succinctly, yet still sometimes it just comes out all wrong. The list reaffirmed my belief that everyone should read their headline out loud and in front of different audiences before running it.
As far as the Lisa Nowark story, I'm a little torn. Obviously tabloids can make great jest at this petty story. They can write the clever headlines. However, I don't think the NYTimes should do such a thing. A credible, mainstream news outlet must take the story as it is: ridiculous, possibly pathetic but still newsworthy as a serious crime was involved. Though I don't think the NYTimes or an outlet of similar status should put an overemphasis on the story, I think it still would need to cover it professionally at least once.
I was interested in the Illinois media headlines about Blagovich's scandal. Were they so critical or harsh because the media outlets themselves were fooled and embarrassed by their own governor and had the right to be upset? I sometimes feel that when the story is closer to home you need to be more cautious but apparently these newspapers did not feel the need to hold back. I think it depends on the situation and Blagovich obviously let a lot of people down inexcusably.
I think that is an important lesson to be learned and applied to our news publication. Look at each situation and how it will affect the people at home and then write the headline accordingly. Seems easy enough but in some cases it might make all the difference.