1) Ask yourself if you need to include numbers in the headline

DO THIS

"Half of Earth’s glaciers could melt even if key warming goal is met, study says"

DON’T DO THIS

“Half of World’s Glaciers to ‘Disappear’ with 1.5C of Global Warming”

DISCUSSION

Though it might seem that adding numbers and statistics to a headline will make its central claim more believable, in many cases, these are not necessary nor as effective. While many people who follow climate topics may know that 1.5 degrees Celsius is a key target, that knowledge is hardly universal. In this case, describing the temperature ("key warming goal") is clearer than providing it precisely. Often, the best climate change headlines are the ones with the fewest numbers. "Half" is far more useful here than specifying "1.5 degrees," since it brings a fairly clear and dramatic image to mind and is a useful term in both headlines.

2) Identify the source of any numbers or statistics included in the headline

DO THIS

"Half of Earth’s glaciers could melt even if key warming goal is met, study says"

DON’T DO THIS

“Half of World’s Glaciers to ‘Disappear’ with 1.5C of Global Warming”

DISCUSSION

These examples also show the importance of sharing the source of numerical estimates to help audiences think critically about climate change predictions. An ideal place to reveal the source for any numbers or statistics is the headline; even including two simple words like “study says” helps, as it points toward the source of the information and provides insights into how it was produced.

3) If you do decide to use numbers in the headline, do so sparingly, and with sufficient context

DO THIS

"The last 8 years were the hottest on record"

DON’T DO THIS

“Earth to Warm 2 degrees Celsius by the End of this Century, Studies Say”

DISCUSSION

Both of the above examples discuss the impact of climate change on global temperatures, but the second one contains little in the way of context. Simply saying that the planet will “warm 2 degrees Celsius” by 2100 may confuse audiences about what a 2-degree Celsius increase in global temperatures actually means. (The story itself does a good job of explaining the 2-degree benchmark in context, but the headline does not). By situating rising temperatures within a historical context, the first example helps readers understand why these reported increases are significant.

4) If you place numbers in your headline, consider adding sub-heads to explain and contextualize any technical terms or concepts

DO THIS

An article with the headline “US transportation CO2 emissions up 14% from 2020 to 2021” includes a subheadline stating that “pollution from gasoline and diesel cars and trucks is harming our health.”

DON’T DO THIS

An article carries the headline “$50 Million to Support Carbon Sequestration, Groundwater Protection.”

DISCUSSION

Subheads or section headers can clarify the meaning of technical terms used in climate science research. The first example does this quite effectively, defining “transportation CO2 emissions” as “pollution from gasoline and diesel cars and trucks.” By contrast, the second example fails to explain what “carbon sequestration” means, and leaves audiences in the dark as to how this money might actually be used.

5) If you use numbers in your headline, use them to tell a story – not as a substitute for a story

DO THIS

"Clean Energy Investment Sets $1.1 Trillion Record, Matching Fossil Fuels For the First Time"

DON’T DO THIS

“Total Investment in Renewable Energy 2022 is $1380 Billion”

DISCUSSION

To ensure that numbers convey something meaningful, context is key. The first example places the $1.1 trillion figure in historical context, noting that this is a “record” that equals the amount invested in fossil fuels. Audiences then may sense that clean energy investments are increasing and may soon outpace investments in fossil fuels. By contrast, the second example contains no contextual cues that would help audiences determine the significance of a “$1380 billion” investment. Readers seeing this headline may wonder if this amount is large or small, and whether it has changed much compared to previous years.

6) “Data” isn’t a person — be explicit about who is interpreting it

DO THIS

"Climate scientist says we’re not measuring the right things to predict drought"

DON’T DO THIS

“Could the next pandemic emerge from melting glaciers? Data says maybe”

DISCUSSION

Phrases like “the data says” are problematic, because they obscure the fact that

data is produced, analyzed, and interpreted by people. To help audiences think critically about the role of human beings in this process, try to avoid phrases like this. The phrase in the first example (“Climate scientist says”) is much better, because it clarifies the number was the result of human interpretation. Instead of “the data,” specify where this comes from (for example, "WHO data").

7) Tell audiences where the numbers came from and explain how they were derived

DO THIS

"Climate Change Fears Driving 40% of People to Avoid Having Children, Survey Finds"

DON’T DO THIS

“A third of people are changing their plans for the future because of climate change”

DISCUSSION

While both headlines report on large multi-country surveys, only the first one spells that out. Even though this is clarified within the story, the second example’s headline says nothing about where the “a third of people” figure comes from, or how it was determined. These are important things for audiences to know, and including that contextual information can be as simple as saying, “survey finds.”

Provide feedback.