Sometimes we journalists, or should we say maybe the editors of journalists, sometimes try to make the point so succinctly that we tend to mislead just a little. The Newsday story about the first day's opening of the Parkade in Port of Spain was titled "Only 800 park at Parkade", suggesting at first glance that only 800 drivers CHOSE to park there on the first day. If that were the case, then the first question would have been, why? Is it that there was not enough advertisement of the space by NIPDEC? Or did drivers just stick to their usual haunts, suggesting there really was no urgent need for Parkade?
But when you read the very first sentence, it explains that "only 800 of the 1,600 car park spaces are currently available for parking." Ohhhhhh! Isn't that a big deal after NIPDEC has been touting the advantages of this space for months?
Media Watch is aware that the explanatory phrase could not fit into the space allotted for the headline, but in trying to tease your reader, perhaps the headline could have read...."Parkade not complete, 800 park on first day" or "Incomplete Parkade Opens", or something like that. What do you think Roxanne?