What Headline Wording Generates the Most Clicks for News Media?
As the media industry becomes increasingly reliant on digital platforms for distribution, the importance of crafting effective headlines has never been more consequential. A well-crafted headline can make the difference between a story going viral or being buried in obscurity—and according to recent research, the individual words chosen for the headline can really impact the outcome of this scenario.
A study conducted by researchers from various educational institutions analyzed the impact of headline wording on click-through rates for news articles. The study found that negative words in headlines tended to generate more clicks than positive ones; for example, headlines that included words like "failure," "crisis," and "scandal" tended to perform better across platforms than those that included more positive language.
“Although positive words were slightly more prevalent than negative words, we found that negative words in news headlines increased consumption rates (and positive words decreased consumption rates),” according to the study. “For a headline of average length, each additional negative word increased the click-through rate by 2.3%. Our results contribute to a better understanding of why users engage with online media.”
In addition to generating more clicks, the articles generated more reactions, or “likes,” on Facebook, “retweets” on Twitter, and were shared more often.
Further, the study found that the specific type of negative emotion conveyed in a headline had a significant impact on how effective it was: “Sad” words, such as "grief" and "mourning," were found to be more effective than “angry” or “scary” words in generating clicks.
So why do negative headlines tend to perform better than positive ones? The answer lies in human nature.
“The negativity bias is our tendency to register negative stimuli more readily than the positive. In any interaction, we are more likely to notice negative things and remember them more vividly,” writes journalist and marketing consultant Eshal Rose. “Humans developed the negativity bias millions of years ago for survival. While the chances of you running into a saber-toothed tiger on your way to work are slim, the brain’s bias has evolved over the years.”
This facet of human nature is so ingrained that Russian news site City Reporter lost close to 2/3rds of its normal viewership and engagement after an experiment where they only posted positive headlines and good news for 24 hours.
Another factor that may contribute to the effectiveness of negative headlines is the power of curiosity, and how negativity and stress hormones interact with the need to find out more information. “As humans, we are born with an inquisitive nature. We enjoy judging and analyzing any information presented to us. While our brain plays a major role in bringing negative information to our attention, these words also elicit a curious response,” Rose explained.
However, it's important to note that the use of negative headlines is not without its risks. A study of Upworthy, a publication known for its punchy, two-sentence headlines, found that both the effectiveness of positive and negative language deteriorated over time. Researchers concluded that while powerfully negative language may generate more clicks in the short-term, they can also have a negative impact on reader trust and engagement over time. In addition, the use of negative headlines can also contribute to the spread of misinformation and sensationalism: by emotionally manipulating the reader, publications sacrifice their commitment to concise, clear, and accurate information in order to get a click and generate revenue. When news outlets begin to prioritize clicks over accuracy, they become more likely to publish sensationalized or misleading headlines that play into people's fears and biases.
In conclusion, the wording of headlines can have a significant impact on how many clicks an article gets, with negative headlines generally performing better than positive ones. However, news outlets must be careful not to prioritize this type of engagement in the long-term, as studies show it is unlikely to last, and this can contribute to the spread of misinformation and erode reader trust over time. Publications must ultimately balance their own needs (revenue, engagement, etc.) with the needs of the consumer (access to accurate, timely information) in order to remain relevant and successful.
