“INNOCENT” Tags

When a story’s “front and center” bloggers, newspapers and other news sources will often lead with a post title or headline “name” tag that lets readers know instantly what the story’s about. The tags also often allow for shorter leads.

“Katrina” is a good tag example. Remember: “Katrina: Due this PM” and “Katrina: Millions Homeless” and “Katrina: The $ Cost?”

Tags were used in the Duke Hoax after the Raleigh News & Observer, in a deliberately fraudulent March 25 story the paper still refuses to retract, created an international news story.

Some of the first Duke Hoax tags included “Duke rape scandal,” “Lacrosse rape case” and just “Duke lacrosse.”

As many of you recall, I used “Duke lacrosse” initially and later dropped it.

In recent months, if I’ve used a tag for a case related post, it’s most often been “Duke Hoax” or “N&O.”

Starting later today I’m adding a new tag to some Hoax case related posts: “INNOCENT.”

Most of you who’ve just read “INNOCENT” understood immediately why I’ll be using that tag: besides cuing readers to a Hoax case post, it will highlight the most critical outcome of the case to date: “INNOCENT.”

There’ll be Hoax related posts in which I won’t use “INNOCENT.” I wouldn’t lead with the “I” tag for the current “N&O Public Editor Scams” series. The “I” tag would just confuse even discerning JinC readers.

Imagine if I posted, “Innocent: N&O Public Editor Scams.” It doesn’t work, does it?

A post title like that might even generate a comment from N&O public editor Ted Vaden thanking me for realizing he doesn’t really mean to scam readers; and saying he just has to do it to keep his job.

On the other hand, later today I’ll post “INNOCENT: Readers Refute N&O.” I think you’ll agree the “I” tag works in that post title just fine.

I’ll be interested to learn what you think after you read the post.

In a few days, I’ll say more about “INNOCENT” tags at JinC.