Stop Changing My %&$*&% Titles!

I can't tell you how frustrating it is to wake up the day after I post an article and see the carefully chosen titles of my articles replaced.

I do believe in the concept of editing, don't get me wrong. I fully support the editors on this site, and the commitment they make to improving our articles.

But when my last three editorials have been given titles that started with the word "Why," I do believe it's time for me to stop quietly changing them back and start addressing the issue.

The three articles in question were originally titled "Champ Car World Series: Reflections," "Does Anybody Remember Kenny Irwin Jr.?," and "Once and for All, Why NASCAR is a Sport."

They became, at the hands of this site's editors, "Why I Miss The Champ Car World Series," "Why NASCAR Fans Should Remember Kenny Irwin Jr.," and "Why NASCAR Drivers Really Are Athletes."

Who else on this site feels that a string of titles like those would cheapen their work?

I consider the title of the article just as important as the article itself. Without a proper title that reflects the tone of the article, the reader will not be interested in reading what I've written.

So to see my carefully chosen headlines replaced with lines that make me sound like a ten-year-old is disheartening, disappointing, and disconcerting.

For the sake of argument, let me explain what I mean about "carefully chosen headlines," using examples of the articles in question.

"Champ Car World Series: Reflections" is a piece about my beloved Champ Cars, which was heavily influenced by Rick Reilly - I had been reading a lot of Reilly's old Sports Illustrated columns that day and wanted to put out something similar. It was a very sentimental column with a title that reflected the delicate nature of the article.

Would Rick Reilly have stuck a ten-year-old's title on a reflective article?

"Does Anybody Remember Kenny Irwin Jr.?" was an angry piece about how the fallen NASCAR driver, who died in 2000, is largely forgotten by the sport and its fans. It was, plain and simple, a rant. It was a rant with an angry title - just like this piece is shaping up to be.

I woke up to find my piece on the front page of the site, as a pick of the day, with a title that doesn't reflect the mood of the piece whatsoever. Waking up to see that title on the front page of the site was one of my most embarrassing moments as a writer.

Finally, "Once and for All, Why NASCAR is a Sport" is another angry piece, inspired by (but not meant to be a part of) this week's Open Mic. To be honest, I didn't want to have my article labeled as part of that event when I first wrote it, but now that I think about it, I'm glad someone added that Open Mic label to the article's teaser.

The title someone else gave the article, however, was the final straw. Not only does "Why NASCAR Drivers Really Are Athletes" have the same ten-year-old title as the last two articles, it completely narrows the focus of the article.

The article is only partially about why NASCAR drivers are athletes. It also addresses why pit crew members are athletes, and is intended on justifying NASCAR as a sport.

I hate when a title doesn't reflect the piece it is attached to.

So here it is: Editors, when you change the titles of people's work, make sure you are actually helping them. Don't give them ten-year-old titles like you've been giving to me. They don't "increase web presence" at all - they make the author look incapable of putting a title on his work.

I apologize for not taking this up with the editors in question, but this site doesn't have a personal messaging system, so this is going out in the open.

And a final word: Don't edit this article. Don't touch it. It's going back to how it was if anyone touches it, warts and all. Frankly, I think that if anyone touches this article, it will no longer say what I mean.

Especially if you mess with my %&$*&% title.