Looking at how newspapers cover debates online, I'm curious - do we still really need the 1-2 line headline summary? It's a relic of print journalism, and so often, the limits prevent meaningful evaluation. You end up with "VP Candidates Clash in Civil Exchanges About COVID" 1/

Which I think leads to a lot of the bland both sides-ing, because there's not enough room to describe each candidate. Like: "Pence Repeatedly Interrupts and Avoids Questions, While Harris Criticizes Administration's Handling of COVID Crisis" 2/

That would be too long for a newspaper headline but would easily fit on a news website. Unless you edit the print version, stop playing by rules that were developed decades ago to deal with outdated print technology! 3/3

Do these headlines really say anything? 4/?

But what if the @nytimes used this part, buried in a deck, as its main headline?

Or what if the @washingtonpost put this Analysis headline at the top of the page? 6/?

Or the @latimes could have used this sub-headline as its main headline:

I feel like most newspaper websites say: Here's the exact same thing we put our print edition, except we embedded videos in a few stories, and also there's some pop-up ads. Enjoy!