Another bad example
I have stopped watching the "news" on TV. I stay "plugged in" to see if anything significant is happening that I should know or pray about. However, I admit I occasionally get sucked in by headlines in the paper or taglines on my iPhone. I believe these headlines or taglines are designed in themselves to "manage" opinions or often to get you to see an ad. Think, most hope you don't actually read the story or do your own "due diligence" on the veracity or "angle" of the story. I was drawn to and then troubled by the Herald's recent headline, "Are outdoor diners really seated far enough apart?"
I was worried that there was significant abuse of the guidelines by restaurants that might lead to a shutdown or cutback for these small businesses which are vital to our economy, especially when small businesses (and churches) have been discriminated against versus the reopening freedoms granted to large box stores like Home Depot, Costco, Jewel, etc. I expected to read an article full of details of multiple restaurants abusing their privileges based on this misleading headline.
The article reported no such abuses with the only negative being that across all DuPage County less than 10 complaints were filed by employees/patrons since May 29. Buried on Page 7 was the rest of the story, with a subtitle that acknowledged the success of restaurants with expanded outdoor seating.
Why wasn't this positive tagline used on Page 1 instead? We need more positives reported buy our media, more objective reporting and less slanting and managing of opinions. Since defunding and restructuring is in vogue, why not start with our mainstream media?
Vincent J. Heaton