News writing: What’s right vs what’s better?

My attention was drawn by a reader to a post on Daily Monitor’s X handle, and specifically to the headline, “Gen Muhoozi promotes 4 top UPDF officers” (December 11). The question in the reader’s minds was: Is it Gen Muhoozi promoting the officers or is it the UPDF promoting them?

The media regularly tags events – and headlines for that matter – to important or prominent personalities as one way of drawing readers. When they do this, they are in effect playing up prominence as a news value. Just to refresh ourselves, there are at least eight news values that guide journalism and news reporting. These are: impact, timeliness, prominence, proximity, the bizarre, conflict, currency and human interest.

“The news value of prominence concerns whether the subject of the story is well-known. 

A ‘normal’ person getting their car stolen likely won't make the news, but if a movie star's car is stolen, it probably will.” – www.stacker.com In the instant case, the headline writer deemed that Gen Muhoozi was more prominent to the readers than UPDF (Uganda People’s Defence Force).

Perhaps! After all, he is the chief of defence forces of Uganda. Daily Monitor is therefore not alone in this. It is a predisposition of journalists to find a prominence angle to the story to give it oomph. There are a few past headlines in Daily Monitor, for example, to show this.

“Gen Museveni promotes 76 UPDF officers” (Daily Monitor, April 07, 2022).“Museveni promotes 528 UPDF officers” (Daily Monitor, January 18, 2022).“Museveni promotes five more senior UPDF officers” (Daily Monitor, June 15, 2021).The name and title of the President is guaranteed to invoke interest in the story and therefore the audience’s engagement with it. 

However, sometime it is a put-off to some readers who are particular about separation of individuals and the offices they hold, and therefore the capacity in which they act. In the referenced story, it is worth noting, though, that the headline on the actual online article was different from that in the X post. It read, “Four top UPDF officers promoted”.

This was good as clearly, the headline writer was this time following a different rule that puts institutions/offices above personalities as recommended in clause 10 of the NMG Editorial Policy Guidelines which reads; "Stories must concentrate on events themselves, not on the names of officials associated with them. A magistrate's or judge’s name and title, for example, should not be published unless his/her actions, remarks or other involvement are pertinent to the case or the story.” 

The lede however stuck to the prominence thinking. “A lede is the first few sentences in a piece of journalistic writing, and writers use it to grab the reader's attention.” It read: “The First Son and chief of Defence Forces (CDF) Gen Muhoozi Kainerugaba on Wednesday announced the promotion of four senior UPDF officers from the rank of brigadier general to acting major general rank”. 

Many will therefore argue – invoking in-house rules and best journalism practices – that mentioning “first son” and the “Gen Muhoozi” name were not necessary in the lede. That they could be brought in later as background.

Those that favour prominence will, however, argue that it was necessary not only for drawing in readers but giving early context to the story. After all, Gen Muhoozi’s name is not your ordinary name. The story did explain that the UPDF Act (as recently amended) apparently gives the CDF authority to promote officers to an acting rank pending confirmation by the C-in-C as was well indicated in the story. That may partially justify prominence.

However, it [UPDF Act] doesn’t give Gen Muhoozi as a person – or the first son for that matter – the said authority. That authority is vested in the office he holds now and the next CDF will exercise the same authority by virtue of the position they will be holding.

Journalists make different judgement calls every day on the content they are processing and in many cases, it is not just a matter of what is right or wrong, but rather a matter of what comes off better.

Send your feedback/complaints to [email protected] or call/text on +256 776 500725. WhatsApp +256 752 500725