Editor’s Note: This column is the first in a monthly series by the managing editor that will address questions of journalism that are of interest to the Harvard community. It is not designed to address issues of particular controversy, but instead seeks to explain the everyday process that is part of The Crimson’s journalistic approach.

• • •

The First Word

No particular headline is inevitable. A good headline is far more than a summary. It has to characterize, in a few brief words, the most important themes and news items of the article it accompanies. There isn’t any magic formula for composing one; writing headlines will always require journalists to make news judgments about what is most important in the day’s events. And because the headline is the first—and sometimes the only—text a reader will see, those judgments will often influence how readers perceive an article or the issue it covers. No newspaper gets the product right every time, but the process of composing headlines can often help to clarify the day’s news—even for the writers and editors.

On April 20, three days into the Progressive Student Labor Movement (PSLM) sit-in in Massachusetts Hall, The Crimson’s lead article was headlined, “Sit-in Draws Counter-Protest, But No Talks.” The article focused on a group of about 20 students who were protesting PSLM’s sit-in. Throughout the protest, both PSLM and the administration had been highly conscious of their public image, and rightfully so. One of the powers of a sit-in is its visibility and potential to mobilize public opinion; the way the protest is reported in the media can have a powerful influence over its eventual success or failure.

Some of our readers were not pleased with the focus of the April 20 article. They pointed out that the crowds supporting the sit-in were far larger than the ones opposed to it. The Crimson, these readers argued, was making a big deal out of a very small group of discontented students.