If a story can ever be linked to a famous – or infamous – person, then you can bet your house that a journalist will scream that link at you from the headline. Like this one in today’s Sydney Morning Herald: Charge dropped in Milat relative’s murder case.
You mean Ivan Milat’s relative has had his murder charge dropped?
No, not really.
And by not really, I mean not at all:
THE teenager who lead police to the body of David Auchterlonie in Belanglo State Forest has had a charge of accessory to murder dropped.
David was killed on his 17th birthday last year after allegedly being hit on the head with an axe during a trip into the forest with three friends.
A relative of the backpacker killer Ivan Milat, who cannot be named because of his age, has been charged with murder.
Yesterday, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions withdrew the charge of being an accessory after the fact against Chase Day, 19.
There’s even a picture of Milat, in a story that has nothing to do with him:
The story is about Day, not the “Milat relative”. The “Milat relative” has nothing to do with this story. So the headline is misleading – which is a nice way of saying it’s wrong. It should be, using their words, Charged dropped in Auchterlonie murder.
Does the MSM really believe that no one will read this story unless they can trick us into thinking that it’s about Ivan Milat? Do they have that little faith in their audience, and in their own skills as reporters and writers? It was the same with the hysterical journalistic panting over ITA BUTTROSE’S NEPHEW OH MY GOD, in which Ita’s name was in the headline and first sentence of every story about her adult nephew. It’s idiotic to constantly mention someone who isn’t even part of the story.