It’s unfortunate that most news media are available online these days. The experience of reading a printed newspaper is beautiful in its own way. the smell of newsprint, the fresh ink on your fingers, and, of course, the odd and (intentionally) funny newspaper headlines. We’ll admit that we miss the world where a news story could not be changed once it was published. An online news story can be altered, improved, or even completely removed. However, there are no reruns once a newspaper reaches the stands or your front porch.
If a headline says, “Slowdown continues to accelerate” or “Meteorite may be from space,” it will always read that way.
Here are 25 of our favorite funny newspaper headlines, many of which probably needed to be changed before being printed. Our loss is their gain. Check out these 40 Random Facts So Hilarious You’ll Want to Tell Your Friends About Them for more laughs.
1 “Forecasters predict rain on Monday, but the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette doesn’t say what will happen on Tuesday.” Take advantage of the weather on Monday while it lasts because the rest of the week might be without any. In addition, take a look at these 30 Funniest Celebrity Memes for even more total silliness.
2 “Amphibious pitcher makes his debut” We were aware that Aqua Man had more goals than just being the Super Friends character who could call dolphins. Additionally, check out these 30 Funny Photos of Celebrities as Teenagers for additional amusement.
Although it is always heartbreaking when a cow is unable to generate a steady income, the editors of The Baltimore Sun’s unintentionally humorous newspaper headline probably had other ideas. Check out the 40 Funniest Animal Jokes for more animal-themed humor.
News organizations began months—years, if you count the trial—of graphic coverage as the world mourned the tragedy. Numerous broadcasts showed footage of the moment the bomb went off, as well as the confusion and smoke that followed. Images that were eerie were all over the newspapers: streets covered in blood, mourning spectators, and clearly shaken victims whose clothes had been torn off.
As a result, Holman and his colleagues from the University of California, Irvine found themselves in the midst of a national crisis and possessed information about the mental health of nearly 5,000 people just before the crisis. They made the decision to see if that had changed in the subsequent weeks.
Being physically present for or personally affected by a terrorist attack is likely to be bad for your mental health, which is intuitively obvious. It was true that the bombings had a negative impact on their mental health, as some of the participants in the study had witnessed them firsthand. However, there was also a turn.
Another group had been shaken even more severely: those who had watched six or more hours of news coverage per day for a week after the explosion but had not witnessed it in person. Strangely, knowing someone who had been hurt or killed or being in the area when the bombs went off did not predict high acute stress as much.
According to Holman, “It was a big “aha” moment for us.” I believe that people greatly overestimate the impact that news can have.
It turns out that news reporting is much more than just a reliable source of information. It has the ability to sneak into our subconscious and interfere with our lives in unexpected ways, from our attitudes toward immigrants to the content of our dreams. It has the potential to influence the health of entire economies, shape our perceptions of other nations, and lead us to miscalculate certain risks. It may make us more likely to experience anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder. There is now evidence that the emotional impact of news coverage can even have an impact on our physical health, increasing our risk of having a heart attack or having health issues in the future.
Television news has seen record viewing figures ever since the first hints of a mysterious new virus emerged from China last year. Millions of people diligently tune in for daily government briefings, updates on the latest fatalities, lockdown rules, and material for their own informal analysis.
However, these sources aren’t the only or even the most important way that we stay informed about current events in 2020. It becomes clear that we are constantly immersed in a soup of news, from the moment we wake up in the morning until the moment we close our eyes each night, when you take into account podcasts, streaming services, radio, social media, websites, which frequently want to send us notifications throughout the day, and links shared by friends.
It’s possible that the bias is also to blame for the fact that the news is rarely lighthearted. The City Reporter, a Russian website, lost two-thirds of its readers in 2014 when they decided to only report positive news for one day. According to Arthur C. Clarke, a writer of science fiction, the newspapers of Utopia would be extremely sterile.
Could our beliefs be being shaped by this additional dose of negativity?
For decades, scientists have known that the general public has a generally negative outlook on their nation’s economic prospects. However, this cannot be the case in reality. One of the foundations of modern economics is the existence of “economic cycles,” or fluctuations in the economy between growth and hardship, supported by decades of research and experience.
It is patently false to believe that the future will always be worse. Additionally, it could be harmful. People won’t invest if they think they won’t have a job or any money in five years, which is bad for the economy. Our collective pessimism could become a self-fulfilling prophecy if taken to its extreme, and there is evidence that the news may be partially to blame.