HEADLESS STORIES, HEADLINES CONTRADICTING ARTICLES, AND A MISLEADING, LEADING DAILY

Headlines must ideally not over-promise the content of newspaper articles, when enticing readers to partake of the stories. But it does happen, especially when sensationalism is the preferred route to higher circulation figures. A headline, however, must never contradict the facts in the main story. Like it happened, in an increasingly misleading Kenyan leading daily.

The article's headline screams:

'Ours is public, not private land, says Del Monte'

But shortly afterwards, in the article's all important first paragraph, this is what one encounters:

Granted. The author of the newspaper article, and the one who crafted the headline, are not the same, and they probably didn't even meet before the article was published.

But there's good reason to believe there was an intermediary, or two (or three and beyond), in either the role of sub-editor or revise editor, (if not news or managing editor), and perchance, an editorial director.

And yet, glaring mistakes are frequently allowed to infuriate the sensibilities of readers.

So, just how easy is it, to confuse the meanings of private and public property, and more importantly, how easy is it to also confuse and annoy 'erudite' readers?

The 'misleading' leading daily was not done yet, on this unfortunate day for its esteemed consumers.

One of the inside stories alludes to some introductory section of an article being on Page 1.

Funny thing is, up to that point, I could not recall coming across such a story, having started reading the paper from the front page.

The sensible thing was to dart back to the main page of the newspaper, doubting I had missed something.

And guess what? There was no such story!

Seeing that I can't demand a refund, (I was reading the office newspaper), my humble appeal to the newspaper's publishers is to weather external pressures and hold on dearly to its refined editors.

Controversial editorials will come and go, but good editors should nevertheless be celebrated, not intimidated, vilified and crucified.

INFIDELITY THAT BURNS WHEN TRUTH BECOMES TOO HOT TO HANDLE

Winds blowing from a stinging editorial in Kenya's top newspaper, have swirled into a public storm. The publisher is trying hard to convince a sceptical audience that the paper's independence is not in jeopardy. But the reality suggests that even though the truth can be too hot to handle, infidelity against it truly burns.

Angry reactions have followed this attempt to sanitize an unpopular decision, which seem to even rile past and current senior staffers of the same media organization.

I...I am....well...I have this 'evil' feeling some sentiments, like those being expressed above are not entirely sincere.

Call me an over-analyser and give me a breathalyser...I just can't help but wonder about the possibility of the media group on the spot, deploying its 'social media monolith' to tenderize the harsh spotlight.

Rarely can one find strong opposition to a decision, so closely stitched with words like, 'To his credit...' strategically leading to the self-criticism-worshipping quote, and link to the big boss's rejoinder.

....I mean, it just appears too calculated, like the post is also intended to achieve a covert purpose.

What do you think...or can we safely conclude that I'm crazy?

Below are other reactions from a fired up social media space.