It’s Sunday, February 12, 2017 and the top headline of The Huffington Post reads, “MILLER CHILLER: SUNDAY CIRCUIT WHIFF!” Now, I’m an educated person who reads the news daily, and in addition to feeling alarmed (which I imagine is the author’s intent), I’m also confused. So I click into the article to find a revised title: “Trump Adviser Stephen Miller Disastrously Tries to Defend Trump.” Miller Chiller… Circuit Whiff!… Disastrously tries… hmmm. I think I know where this article is going.
I wonder what the “other side” of the aisle has front and center for us today? With a quick search, I find the following in large print featured on Fox News: “‘ENORMOUS EVIDENCE’: Trump advisor says there is proof of voter fraud in U.S., while critics call for data.” I wonder which part of this headline will resonate most with readers: the enlarged, emphasized opening crying, “ENORMOUS EVIDENCE,” or the little opposing part at the end about a potential lack of sufficient data to support Trump’s claim?
As an educator in the Oakland Unified School District, I immediately wonder what meaning the high school students I serve would make of the headlines above. What background knowledge do they have, both on the subject matter and on the two publications? What predictions might they make about each article just by reading the titles? What similarities might they notice? What differences would they identify? Perhaps most importantly, what do I understand about the significance of these competing headlines that our students might not immediately grasp?