Indeed, the story ran after a very full day of events at Harvard. Nearly 50 students had held a candlelight vigil that evening; at a noon rally, nearly 100 people circled Mass. Hall in support of the occupants; and a group of students at Yale had held a rally to show their support as well.

Out of that mix, we had to decide what, in the larger picture, should be considered the most significant of these events. What would students on campus want to know the next morning? What would someone going through our archives next semester or several years from now think was most important about that particular day?

We concluded that the counter-protest needed to be the focus of the article. April 19 was the first day that Harvard’s campus saw active and organized student opposition to PSLM—as opposed to support or silence. This was unusual and unexpected, and we thought it was important to note that some students opposed the sit-in strongly enough to protest against it. We had already reported that PSLM had taken over administrative offices, and that the group had mobilized support outside of the building in the form of rallies and speakers. The counter-protest was therefore the major new development for that day and merited the highest placement.

The number of participants in the counter-protest was certainly smaller than in the other rallies that occurred on April 19. But the size of a protest is not the only indicator of its significance. We had covered demonstrations in support of a living wage that attracted fewer than 20 students because they illustrated increasingly visible and public activism on campus. It seemed only fair to cover demonstrations of similar size and significance when they opposed PSLM.

The process was one that reinforced the importance of picking the right headline. It also highlighted the risks inherent in distilling any news article into a concise title phrase.

• • •