what does zinger mean in an essay

I did then what I knew how to do. Now that I know better, I do better.

Unveiling The Art Of Zingers In Writing

• Exclusive Education Features
• December 21, 2023 December 21, 2023
• by emmetthouse

When it comes to crafting powerful and impactful writing, a zinger is a crucial element that can make a real difference. But what exactly is a zinger? In this article, we will dive into the definition and importance of a zinger in writing, as well as provide helpful tips on how to incorporate them into your own writing. So, whether you are a seasoned writer or just starting out, read on to discover the key to creating memorable and effective pieces of writing.

Definition of a Zinger in Writing

Writing has the power to entertain, inform, and persuade readers. As a writer, you have the ability to captivate your audience and keep them engaged until the very end. One effective way to achieve this is by using a literary technique called a zinger. In simple terms, a zinger is a clever or unexpected twist at the end of a piece of writing that leaves a lasting impact on the reader. In this article, we will take an in-depth look at what a zinger is, how it can be used in writing, and why it is an essential tool for any writer.

Understanding the Concept of a Zinger

The term "zinger" originates from the word "zing," which means to move quickly, sharply, or with a high-pitched sound. In the context of writing, a zinger refers to a sharp or striking statement that is delivered at the end of a piece of writing. It is meant to surprise the reader and leave a lasting impression. Think of it as a final punchline in a joke – it may not be what the reader expects, but it ultimately ties the entire piece together in an impactful way.

In order to understand the power of a zinger, lets take a look at an example. Imagine you are reading a suspenseful crime novel. The protagonist has been on a mission to catch the killer, and just when you think they have succeeded, the author drops a zinger – the killer turns out to be someone completely unexpected. This sudden plot twist takes the story to a whole new level, leaving the reader shocked and intrigued. This is the power of a well-crafted zinger – it adds depth and unpredictability to a piece of writing, making it more memorable and engaging.

Using Zingers in Writing

Now that we have a basic understanding of what a zinger is, lets explore how it can be used in writing. Zingers are commonly used in various forms of writing, such as fiction, non-fiction, speeches, and even business communication. Here are a few techniques to effectively use zingers in your writing:

1. Use Zingers as a Conclusion

Zingers are often used as the final statement in a piece of writing. This technique works well for essays, articles, and speeches, where the writer wants to leave a lasting impression on the reader or audience. By placing the zinger at the end, you ensure that it is the last thing the reader remembers. This leaves them with a strong takeaway, making your writing more impactful.

2. Incorporate Zingers Throughout Your Writing

Alternatively, you can sprinkle zingers throughout your writing to keep the reader engaged. This technique is commonly used in fiction writing, where the author adds plot twists and unexpected revelations to keep the reader hooked. By using zingers strategically, you can maintain the element of surprise and create a sense of anticipation for whats to come.

3. Make Use of Humor

Humor is an effective way to make your zingers stand out. By using lighthearted and unexpected statements, you can add humor to your writing and make it more enjoyable for the reader. However, it is important to use this technique carefully – too much humor can take away from the impact of your zinger. Use it sparingly and in appropriate situations to make the most out of your zingers.

4. Use Zingers to Challenge Assumptions

Zingers can also be used to challenge the readers assumptions and make them think critically about a topic. By catching them off guard with a surprising statement, you can encourage them to look at things from a different perspective. This is a great technique for persuasive writing, as it can help you present your argument in a unique and thought-provoking way.

As with any writing technique, it is important to use zingers in moderation and at appropriate moments. Overusing them or placing them in irrelevant situations can make them lose their impact and come across as forced or gimmicky.

Why Zingers are Important in Writing

Now that we have explored how zingers can be used in writing, lets delve into why they are such an important tool for writers:

1. Keeps the Reader Engaged

With the constant influx of information and distractions, it can be challenging to keep a reader engaged until the end of a piece of writing. Zingers provide a break from the predictable flow of writing and add an element of surprise, making the reader want to continue reading. By keeping them on their toes, you increase the chances of them staying engaged until the very end.

2. Creates a Memorable Experience

The ultimate goal of any writer is to create a memorable experience for their readers. Zingers play a crucial role in achieving this goal – by adding a twist or unexpected element to your writing, you make it stand out and leave a lasting impression on the readers mind. This is especially important for business writing, where you want to leave a positive and lasting impact on your audience.

3. Adds Depth and Creativity

Zingers allow writers to inject creativity and depth into their writing. By using this literary technique, you can add complexity and depth to your plot, characters, and ideas. This makes your writing more interesting and thought-provoking, keeping the reader engaged and wanting to know more.

What is a Zinger in Writing: https://fischerinstitute.com/techniques-for-writing-medical-research-paper/

In Conclusion

A zinger is a powerful tool that can elevate your writing from good to great. By incorporating clever, unexpected statements at strategic points in your writing, you can engage, entertain, and leave a lasting impact on your readers. Whether you are writing fiction, non-fiction, or business communication, using zingers can make your writing stand out and create a memorable experience for your audience. So, the next time you sit down to write, think about how you can use zingers to enhance your piece and captivate your readers until the very end.

In conclusion, a zinger is a clever and surprising statement or phrase added at the end of a piece of writing to leave a lasting impact on the reader. It can be used in various forms of writing such as speeches, essays, and advertisements. The purpose of a zinger is to grab the audiences attention, add humor or emotion, and ultimately reinforce the main message of the writing. Using zingers effectively can elevate the quality of writing and make it more memorable. So, next time youre writing, dont forget to add a zinger to make your writing stand out!

Emmett House is a 29 yo school teacher and blogger who is passionate about education. He has a vast amount of experience in the field and is always eager to share his insights with others. Emmett is a dedicated teacher who truly cares about his students' success. He is also an expert on using technology in the classroom, and is always looking for new ways to engage his students.

View all posts

• More from M-W
• To save this word, you'll need to log in. Log In

Definition of zinger

Examples of zinger in a sentence.

These examples are programmatically compiled from various online sources to illustrate current usage of the word 'zinger.' Any opinions expressed in the examples do not represent those of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Send us feedback about these examples.

Word History

1955, in the meaning defined at sense 1

Dictionary Entries Near zinger

Cite this entry.

“Zinger.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary , Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/zinger. Accessed 21 Apr. 2024.

More from Merriam-Webster on zinger

Thesaurus: All synonyms and antonyms for zinger

Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free!

Can you solve 4 words at once?

Word of the day, noblesse oblige.

See Definitions and Examples »

Get Word of the Day daily email!

Popular in Grammar & Usage

Your vs. you're: how to use them correctly, every letter is silent, sometimes: a-z list of examples, more commonly mispronounced words, how to use em dashes (—), en dashes (–) , and hyphens (-), absent letters that are heard anyway, popular in wordplay, the words of the week - apr. 19, 10 words from taylor swift songs (merriam's version), a great big list of bread words, 10 scrabble words without any vowels, 12 more bird names that sound like insults (and sometimes are), games & quizzes.

• Cambridge Dictionary +Plus

Meaning of zinger in English

Your browser doesn't support HTML5 audio

• bone dry idiom
• non-serious
• photobombing
• standing joke

You can also find related words, phrases, and synonyms in the topics:

Examples of zinger

Translations of zinger.

Get a quick, free translation!

Word of the Day

have irons in the fire

to be involved with many activities or jobs at the same time or to make certain that there are always several possibilities available

Binding, nailing, and gluing: talking about fastening things together

Learn more with +Plus

• Recent and Recommended {{#preferredDictionaries}} {{name}} {{/preferredDictionaries}}
• Definitions Clear explanations of natural written and spoken English English Learner’s Dictionary Essential British English Essential American English
• Grammar and thesaurus Usage explanations of natural written and spoken English Grammar Thesaurus
• Pronunciation British and American pronunciations with audio English Pronunciation
• English–Chinese (Simplified) Chinese (Simplified)–English
• English–Chinese (Traditional) Chinese (Traditional)–English
• English–Dutch Dutch–English
• English–French French–English
• English–German German–English
• English–Indonesian Indonesian–English
• English–Italian Italian–English
• English–Japanese Japanese–English
• English–Norwegian Norwegian–English
• English–Polish Polish–English
• English–Portuguese Portuguese–English
• English–Spanish Spanish–English
• English–Swedish Swedish–English
• Dictionary +Plus Word Lists
• English    Noun
• Translations
• All translations

Add zinger to one of your lists below, or create a new one.

{{message}}

Something went wrong.

There was a problem sending your report.

Words and phrases

Personal account.

• Access or purchase personal subscriptions
• Get our newsletter
• Save searches
• Set display preferences

Institutional access

Sign in with library card

Sign in with username / password

Recommend to your librarian

Institutional account management

Sign in as administrator on Oxford Academic

zinger noun

• Hide all quotations

Earlier version

• zinger in OED Second Edition (1989)

What does the noun zinger mean?

There are four meanings listed in OED's entry for the noun zinger . See ‘Meaning & use’ for definitions, usage, and quotation evidence.

How common is the noun zinger ?

How is the noun zinger pronounced, british english, u.s. english, where does the noun zinger come from.

Earliest known use

The earliest known use of the noun zinger is in the 1900s.

OED's earliest evidence for zinger is from 1906, in the Inlander .

zinger is formed within English, by derivation.

Etymons: zing v. , ‑er suffix 1 .

Nearby entries

• zinfandel, n. 1880–
• zing, v. 1899–
• zing, int. & n. 1875–
• zingana, n.¹ 1883
• zingana, n.² 1911–
• Zingani, n. 1581–1879
• Zingara, n. 1756–
• Zingaro, n. 1600–
• zingel, n. 1803–
• zingelin perch, n. 1803
• zinger, n. 1906–
• Zingg, n. 1941–
• zingho, n. 1743
• zingiber, n. ?1720–
• zingiberaceous, adj. 1821–
• zingily, adv. 1951–
• zinginess, n. 1938–
• zinging, n. 1921–
• zinging, adj. 1915–
• zingingly, adv. 1952–
• zingo, int. 1906–

Meaning & use

Then Sling slammed a zinger across the outside corner.

Carlton hit a zinger , but Lopes somehow managed to glove the ball and turn it into a doubleplay.

Then came another zinger on the inside corner... The ump called it a ball.

Every time Laura hits a zinger down the line and I can't get to it, I think, That's my doubles partner, that's awesome.

The payoff is this zinger : some of the stud bosses are so desperate and the going is so tough that they're eying the scribe sheets to pick up on a possible slave.

I would drone along..asking tired questions... Then I would throw in the zinger and watch what happened.

There's a zinger toward the end, in which the nominal hit man gets hit, but it doesn't really compensate for the tedium the reader's gone through.

Someone might throw you a zinger or make demands of you or surprise you in some way.

• catch 1674–93 A question or statement designed to trick or deceive. Cf. catch question , n. Obsolete .
• catch question 1836– A question that is intended to catch a person out, typically one to which there is no correct answer, or which leads the respondent to give an…
• trick question 1939– A question designed to elicit more information than it appears to on the surface, or to trick the respondent into giving a wrong answer.
• zinger 1954– A question or remark designed to surprise or disorientate; an unexpected turn of events, a plot twist.
• plot twist 1920– An unexpected turn of events in a work of fiction, etc.; = twist , n.¹ III.21c.
• twist 1941– figurative . An unexpected development of events, esp. in a work of fiction; a change from usual procedure.
• twisteroo 1963– (A narrative with) an unexpected twist.

Ann-Margret is giving him a hard time on the home front, too, tossing out little zingers about his advancing age.

One more zinger about my height, and I shall be compelled to thrash you mercilessly.

For someone who didn't have a mean bone in his body, he tended to land some zingers .

Packed with zingers , it's also a showcase for Moore's talent as a one-liner man.

• tag line 1926– = punchline , n.
• boffo 1934– In the entertainment industry: a joke, punch-line, or piece of comic business, esp. one that elicits uproarious or unrestrained laughter. Hence: a…
• payoff line 1934– The punchline or dénouement of a joke, story, etc.
• zinger 1970– A pointed or amusing remark, esp. one intended to humiliate or criticize; a quick-witted remark or observation, a wisecrack, esp. an effective one.

I don't know why it was such a zinger , unless it was that it was very big and very cheap.

I think every actress needs one zinger of a part early in her career.

A zinger of a novel.

My private collection was becoming what an American friend..described as a ‘ zinger ’.

A joyous female-centric update of a genre that's not really had a zinger of a mainstream film since Superbad.

• star Old English– figurative and in figurative contexts. A person or thing likened to a star, esp. one considered as a source of inspiration or enlightenment.
• dainty 1340–1798 concrete . Anything estimable, choice, fine, pleasing or delightful; hence occasionally, a luxury, rarity (cf. dainty , adj. 2). Obsolete except as…
• daisy c1485–1605 As a term of admiration. Obsolete .
• say-piece 1535–1824 A trial specimen; a sample; esp. a test piece made by a craftsman and submitted to a guild or corporation as proof of his competence to be admitted…
• bravery 1583–1657 A thing of beauty or interest, a thing to exhibit. Obsolete .
• paragon 1585– An object of outstanding quality or value; an object which serves as a model of some quality.
• daint 1633 = dainty , n.
• rapper 1653– A remarkably good or large example of something; a person who excels in an activity. Cf. rapping , adj. 2. Now English regional ( Yorkshire ).
• supernaculum 1704– A drink to be consumed to the last drop; a wine of the highest quality. Frequently (and in earliest use) figurative : anything excellent of its…
• dandy 1785– slang or colloquial . Anything superlatively fine, neat, or dainty; esp. in the dandy (now usually a dandy ), ‘the correct thing’, ‘the ticket’. Also…
• roarer 1813–82 U.S. slang . A remarkable or outstanding person; a person (occasionally a thing) regarded as superlative or notable. See also ring-tailed roarer at r …
• sneezer 1823– In various slang, colloquial, or dialect senses. Something exceptionally good, great, strong, violent, etc., in some respect (cf. quots.).
• plum 1825– slang . More generally: any desirable thing, a coveted prize; the pick of a collection of things; one of the best things in a book, piece of music…
• trimmer 1827– One who or that which trims or trounces (see trim , v. II.10); a stiff competitor, fighter, etc.; a slasher; a stiff letter, article, bout, run…
• sockdolager 1838– Something exceptional in any respect, esp. a large fish.
• rasper 1844– slang . Anything remarkable or extraordinary; (now) esp. ( Sport ) a powerful, fast-moving shot or ball.
• dinger 1861– colloquial (chiefly U.S. and (now esp.) Irish English ). An impressive or exceptional thing or (less commonly) person; something superlative of…
• job 1863– colloquial (originally U.S. ). Chiefly with modifying word. A thing of a type specified or evident from the context, esp. something manufactured or…
• fizzer 1866– slang . Anything excellent or first-rate.
• champagne 1880– figurative . Something likened to champagne in being excellent or exhilarating.
• beauty 1882– colloquial . An exceptionally good, impressive, or ( ironically ) egregious example of something. Also in a beauty of a — . Cf. beaut , n. A.2.
• pie 1884–1902 colloquial (originally U.S. ). Something very pleasant or pleasurable to deal with; something to be eagerly appropriated; a prize, a treat. Obsolete .
• smasher 1894– slang . Anything uncommon, extraordinary, or unusual, esp. unusually large or excellent.
• crackerjack 1895– Something that is exceptionally fine or splendid. Also, a person who is exceptionally skilful or expert.
• Taj Mahal 1895– The name of a mausoleum built at Agra by Shah Jahan in memory of his wife known as Mumtaz (Persian… figurative denoting that which is excellent or…
• beaut 1896– A beautiful or impressive thing or animal. Also: an outstanding or ( ironically ) egregious example of something (cf. beauty , n. II.5d).
• pearler 1901– = purler , n. 2.
• lollapalooza 1904– Something outstandingly good of its kind.
• bearcat 1909– colloquial (originally and chiefly U.S. ). A formidable, powerful, or impressive thing; a remarkable or excellent example of its kind. Frequently with…
• beaner 1911– An impressive or excellent thing; an outstanding example of its kind. Now rare .
• grande dame 1915– figurative . Something considered prestigious, venerable, or pre-eminent in a particular sphere (frequently with an accompanying sense of respect and…
• Rolls-Royce 1916– With of . Any product considered to be the highest quality or best example of its type or field.
• the nuts 1917– In plural . slang (originally and chiefly U.S. ). the nuts : an excellent or first-rate person or thing; ( Cards ) an unbeatable hand.
• pipperoo 1939– A particularly remarkable or pleasing person or thing. Cf. pip , n.² 3, pippin , n. 3b.
• rubydazzler 1941– Something exceptionally fine; cf. bobby-dazzler , n.
• rumpty 1941– An excellent person or thing.
• rumptydooler 1941– An excellent person or thing. Also as adj. Cf. rumpty , adj. & n.³
• snodger 1941– Excellent, very good, first-rate. Also as adv. and n.
• sockeroo 1942– Something with an overwhelming impact, a ‘smash’.
• sweetheart 1942– North American . Anything especially good of its kind. Cf. honey , n. A.II.6a.
• zinger 1955– Something which is a remarkable, exciting, or excellent example of its kind. Frequently in a zinger of a —— .
• blue-chipper 1957– Something of great quality.
• ring-a-ding 1959– A superb or excellent thing; a remarkable example of something.
• premier cru 1965– A growth or vineyard that produces wine of a superior grade; the wine itself. Also in extended use and figurative . Cf. cru , n. , growth , n.¹ 1d and…
• sharpie 1970– North American colloquial . That which is smart or in good condition. Used esp. of cars. Cf. sharp , adj. A.7a, A.1c; sharp , n.¹ B.13.
• stormer 1978– U.K. slang . Something of surpassing size, vigour, or excellence.

Pronunciation

• ð th ee
• ɬ rhingy ll

Some consonants can take the function of the vowel in unstressed syllables. Where necessary, a syllabic marker diacritic is used, hence <petal> /ˈpɛtl/ but <petally> /ˈpɛtl̩i/.

• a trap, bath
• ɑː start, palm, bath
• ɔː thought, force
• ᵻ (/ɪ/-/ə/)
• ᵿ (/ʊ/-/ə/)

Other symbols

• The symbol ˈ at the beginning of a syllable indicates that that syllable is pronounced with primary stress.
• The symbol ˌ at the beginning of a syllable indicates that that syllable is pronounced with secondary stress.
• Round brackets ( ) in a transcription indicate that the symbol within the brackets is optional.

View the pronunciation model here .

* /d/ also represents a 'tapped' /t/ as in <bitter>

Some consonants can take the function of the vowel in unstressed syllables. Where necessary, a syllabic marker diacritic is used, hence <petal> /ˈpɛd(ə)l/ but <petally> /ˈpɛdl̩i/.

• i fleece, happ y
• æ trap, bath
• ɑ lot, palm, cloth, thought
• ɔ cloth, thought
• ɔr north, force
• ə strut, comm a
• ər nurse, lett er
• ɛ(ə)r square
• æ̃ sal on

Simple Text Respell

Simple text respell breaks words into syllables, separated by a hyphen. The syllable which carries the primary stress is written in capital letters. This key covers both British and U.S. English Simple Text Respell.

b, d, f, h, k, l, m, n, p, r, s, t, v, w and z have their standard English values

• arr carry (British only)
• a(ng) gratin
• o lot (British only)
• orr sorry (British only)
• o(ng) salon

zinger typically occurs about 0.04 times per million words in modern written English.

zinger is in frequency band 3, which contains words occurring between 0.01 and 0.1 times per million words in modern written English. More about OED's frequency bands

Frequency of zinger, n. , 1950–2010

* Occurrences per million words in written English

Historical frequency series are derived from Google Books Ngrams (version 2), a data set based on the Google Books corpus of several million books printed in English between 1500 and 2010.

The overall frequency for a given word is calculated by summing frequencies for the main form of the word, any plural or inflected forms, and any major spelling variations.

For sets of homographs (distinct entries that share the same word-form, e.g. mole , n.¹, mole , n.², mole , n.³, etc.), we have estimated the frequency of each homograph entry as a fraction of the total Ngrams frequency for the word-form. This may result in inaccuracies.

Smoothing has been applied to series for lower-frequency words, using a moving-average algorithm. This reduces short-term fluctuations, which may be produced by variability in the content of the Google Books corpus.

Frequency of zinger, n. , 2017–2023

Modern frequency series are derived from a corpus of 20 billion words, covering the period from 2017 to the present. The corpus is mainly compiled from online news sources, and covers all major varieties of World English.

Smoothing has been applied to series for lower-frequency words, using a moving-average algorithm. This reduces short-term fluctuations, which may be produced by variability in the content of the corpus.

Entry history for zinger, n.

zinger, n. was revised in March 2021.

zinger, n. was last modified in July 2023.

oed.com is a living text, updated every three months. Modifications may include:

• further revisions to definitions, pronunciation, etymology, headwords, variant spellings, quotations, and dates;
• new senses, phrases, and quotations.

Revisions and additions of this kind were last incorporated into zinger, n. in July 2023.

Earlier versions of this entry were published in:

A Supplement to the OED, Volume IV (1986)

• Find out more

OED Second Edition (1989)

• View zinger in OED Second Edition

Please submit your feedback for zinger, n.

Please include your email address if you are happy to be contacted about your feedback. OUP will not use this email address for any other purpose.

Citation details

Factsheet for zinger, n., browse entry.

• Dictionaries home
• American English
• Collocations
• German-English
• Grammar home
• Practical English Usage
• Learn & Practise Grammar (Beta)
• Word Lists home
• My Word Lists
• Recent additions
• Resources home
• Text Checker

Definition of zinger noun from the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary

• She opened the speech with a real zinger.

Join our community to access the latest language learning and assessment tips from Oxford University Press!

Nearby words

• Fred Zinnemann

Reporting Topics

Explore our articles database by topic:

Zingers, quotes, anecdotes and other things that make your writing great

When we think about how to get eyeballs on our reporting these days, we talk a lot about Twitter and Facebook and online branding.

Weber was part of the Los Angeles Times team that reported the 2004 Pultizer Prize-winning series The Troubles at King/Drew , groundbreaking reportage that led to the closure of a major urban hospital. Here are some of the major lessons she learned while telling blockbuster health stories.

Even with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), Weber says, "there are all manner of ways to find out what it's like in a hospital." Documents can get you more than dry day -- they can proved the fodder for great stories . Weber offers several examples of how documents gave her great leads:

-Employee disciplinary records -- which become public when an employee makes an appeal -- often have graphic details about employee conduct, medical misconduct. Weber once discovered that a nurse had a janitor administer medications this way. 

-Workers compensation records revealed that King/Drew had a surprisingly high rate of "chair falls," giving color to a story about hospital funding . It also gave Weber and the rest of the team an excellent lead for a section of the piece: "Vast sums at King/Drew go to workers injured in encounters with seemingly harmless objects. Take, for instance, the chair."

-Public hospitals have records of how many surgeries and procedures are being done. Couple that with salary information and you might find inconsistencies. This is how Weber discovered information about the salary of King/Drew's neuroscience chief: "As neurosciences chief, Locke made a total of more than $1 million over the last two fiscal years. That includes his hospital salary and a stipend he receives from King/Drew's affiliated medical school, records show. Top county officials can't say what Locke does for all the money he earns."

-Nursing boards, medical boards and other oversight agencies' records are powerful tools. Weber, with a ProPublica team, reported on the misconduct of registered nurses in 2009 and offered a tutorial for how you can do similar reporting .

-Criminal records can provide information about health care providers. Weber visited six courthouses to get records about one of the nurses in her 2009 ProPublica report.

Telling stories is a process that begins when you are reporting . "Don't leave this until you're back at your desk," says Weber. "You need to be thinking along the way, is there color?"

You can use a straight lead  -- it can be really effective way to get to the heart of a story. But Weber says that a great anecdote can get to the heart of complicated subjects . "What I look for in an anecdote is something that can tell your entire story," says Weber. "I try to look for one that is a small version of the bigger story." She offers the example of a 2009 ProPublica report by Robin Fields about the risks of dialysis . The story has a paragraph that begins with data and facts, but what readers remember and comment on most is an anecdote about bugs:

Conditions within clinics are sometimes shockingly poor. ProPublica examined inspection records for more than 1,500 clinics in California, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Texas from 2002 to 2009. Surveyors came across filthy or unsafe conditions in almost half the units they checked. At some, they found blood encrusted in the folds of patients' treatment chairs or spattered on walls, floors or ceiling tiles. Ants were so common at a unit in Durham, N.C., that when a patient complained, a staffer just handed him a can of bug spray. 

" If the quote's boring, don't use it ," says Weber. Avoid the "tendency to quote from the official document because it's official, or quote an official." If the quote is unclear or unengaging, call back for another quote or quote an expert somewhere else.

Your reporting doesn't have to be a big project . Even one amazing story in one document can give you a single quick and powerful story.

"I like to have a good, solid end on story that's a real zinger ," Weber says. "I think the purpose of the ending is to leave the reader with what the story means." A story about severe medical errors at King/Drew ends with a powerful quote: "She lives in King/Drew's shadow. She can see it from the rear window of her apartment. 'Every time I look at that hospital I think about what happened to me,' Clemons said. 'That hospital took my life away from me.'"

Write a great lead . Weber says she went through 75 leads with her editor at the Los Angeles Times on the King/Drew medical errors story.

Pay attention to your bullets and don't use them if they are not impactful . "Your bullets have to be so incisive, but also have a zinger," says Weber. Bullets help get your points up at the top, but also adds color and helps you outline a big project.

Sections should be each be mini-stories with "a saucy lead and a saucy end," Weber says. "You're going to have an arc for your whole story, but also for each section."

Keep sources on the record and get documentation for everything to help shield you from lawsuits , says Weber. (Learn more about legal resources for journalists from a prior post .)

essay.solutions

The only dreams impossible to reach are the ones you never pursue.

Mastering The Art Of Writing Zingers: Unlocking The Impact

Have you ever come across a piece of writing that left you with an unexpected, witty punchline or final twist? That clever and surprising line is known as a zinger. But what exactly does this term mean in the context of writing? In this article, we will delve into the definition of a zinger in writing, its purpose, and techniques for crafting and incorporating them into your own writing. Whether you want to enhance your storytelling skills or add a bit of spice to your essays, mastering the art of writing zingers can take your writing to the next level. So, let’s unleash the power of zingers in writing together.

What Does a Zinger Mean in Writing?

When reading a piece of writing, have you ever come across a sentence or phrase that immediately grabs your attention and makes you think, "Wow, that was clever!"? That, my friend, is called a zinger .

A zinger is a witty and attention-grabbing line or statement that is often used at the end of a paragraph or article. It serves to leave a lasting impression on the reader and make them think about the main point of the writing.

Most commonly used in creative writing, speeches, or essays, a zinger can also be incorporated into any form of writing to make it more interesting and engaging. So, let’s dive deeper into what exactly a zinger is, its purpose, and how you can craft one in your own writing.

Zinger Definition in Writing

The term "zinger" originated from the word "zing," which means a sharp sound or sensation. In writing, a zinger is a short, punchy sentence that creates an impact on the reader.

It is a clever and thought-provoking way to summarize the main message of a piece of writing. A zinger can be funny, surprising, or even controversial, but it always has a purpose – to capture the reader’s attention and leave a lasting impression.

Some examples of famous zingers include:

• "I can resist anything except temptation." – Oscar Wilde
• "If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they’ll kill you." – George Bernard Shaw
• "Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." – Oscar Wilde
• "Knowledge speaks, but wisdom listens." – Jimi Hendrix

These zingers are not only witty and clever but also reflect the style and message of the writers, making them memorable and impactful.

Explaining a Zinger in Writing

A zinger is not just a random line thrown in at the end of a piece of writing. It requires careful thought and consideration to be effective. So, how exactly does a zinger work?

A zinger typically follows these guidelines:

• It is placed towards the end of a paragraph or article
• It is short and concise, no more than one or two sentences
• It is attention-grabbing and thought-provoking
• It reflects the main message or theme of the writing
• It has a clever play on words or humorous element
• It leaves a lasting impact on the reader

A well-crafted zinger is like the cherry on top of a sundae – it adds that extra bit of flavor and makes the whole thing more enjoyable.

The Purpose of a Zinger in Writing

Now that we know what a zinger is and how it works, let’s explore its purpose in writing.

The main goal of a zinger is to leave a strong impression on the reader. It serves to summarize the main message or theme of the writing in a memorable and impactful way. A zinger can also create a sense of closure for the reader and tie all the main points together.

Additionally, a zinger can add an element of surprise or humor to the writing, making it more enjoyable to read. It can also serve as a call to action or leave the reader with something to think about.

In essence, a zinger is a powerful tool that can enhance the overall quality and impact of your writing.

Crafting a Zinger in Writing

So, how can you craft a zinger that will make your writing stand out? Here are some techniques to help you come up with a catchy and effective zinger:

• Use wordplay: Playing with words is a great way to create a memorable zinger. Look for words that have multiple meanings or sound similar, and use them in a clever way.
• Inject humor: Adding humor to your zinger can make it more enjoyable and give it an extra punch. Just make sure it aligns with the tone and message of your writing.
• Make a bold statement: A zinger can be a controversial or thought-provoking statement that will make the reader stop and think. This can be a powerful way to make your zinger stand out.
• Add a twist: Surprise your readers with a twist at the end of your zinger. This can create a sense of intrigue and make your writing more memorable.
• Use quotes: Famous quotes can make for great zingers, especially if they relate to the main message of your writing.

Remember, a zinger should not feel forced or out of place in your writing. It should flow naturally and serve its purpose of leaving an impact on the reader.

Incorporating a Zinger into Your Writing

Now that you have some techniques for crafting a zinger, let’s look at how you can incorporate it into your writing.

The best place to add a zinger is towards the end of a paragraph or article. This ensures that the reader has already absorbed the main points and is now ready to be hit with something memorable and impactful.

You can also use zingers in the introduction to hook your readers and make them want to continue reading. In this case, it should serve as a teaser for what’s to come and make the reader curious about what you have to say.

Another way to incorporate a zinger is to use it as a concluding statement, leaving the reader with a final thought or call to action. This can be especially effective in persuasive or informative writing.

Enhancing Writing with a Zinger

Incorporating a zinger into your writing can take it from good to great. It adds an extra layer of interest and makes your writing more memorable and impactful. Additionally, a well-crafted zinger can also showcase your writing skills and style.

A zinger can also break up long paragraphs or chunks of information, providing a breather for the reader and making your writing more visually appealing.

Unleashing a Zinger in Writing

Zingers are not just limited to creative writing or speeches. They can be used in any form of writing to make it more engaging and interesting. Whether you’re writing an academic paper, an email, or a social media post, you can use a zinger to catch the reader’s attention and leave a lasting impression.

So, don’t be afraid to unleash your inner wit and creativity in your writing. A well-crafted zinger can turn a mundane piece of writing into something unforgettable.

Perfecting the Art of Writing Zingers

Crafting a zinger is an art that takes practice and skill. Some writers have a natural talent for it, while others may need to work on honing their skills. Regardless of your level of expertise, here are some tips to help you perfect the art of writing zingers:

• Read, read, read: The more you read, the more you’ll come across different styles of writing and zingers. This can give you inspiration and ideas for crafting your own.
• Practice, practice, practice: Like any other skill, writing zingers takes practice. Make it a habit to incorporate them into your writing and experiment with different techniques to find what works for you.
• Know your audience: A zinger that works for one audience may not resonate with another. Before adding a zinger to your writing, consider who will be reading it and tailor it accordingly.
• Don’t force it: A zinger should come naturally and not feel forced or out of place. If you’re struggling to come up with one, it’s okay to leave it out and focus on other elements of your writing.

With time and practice, you’ll be able to perfect the art of writing zingers and make your writing more impactful and engaging.

A zinger is a powerful tool in a writer’s arsenal that can make their writing stand out and leave a lasting impression on the reader. It is a clever and impactful sentence or phrase that summarizes the main message of a piece of writing and adds an element of surprise or humor.

Whether you’re a beginner or a seasoned writer, incorporating zingers into your writing can greatly enhance its quality and impact. So, go ahead and unleash your creativity, and let your zingers do the talking!

In conclusion, a zinger in writing is a powerful and attention-grabbing statement designed to leave a lasting impact on the reader. Its purpose is to surprise, entertain, or persuade the audience, making it an essential tool for any writer looking to enhance their work. Crafting a perfect zinger requires skill and practice, but by using techniques such as wordplay, irony, and humor, one can effectively incorporate it into their writing. Whether you are writing an essay, speech, or even a novel, utilizing a zinger can elevate your work to new heights. So unleash your creativity and perfect the art of writing zingers to captivate your audience and leave a lasting impression. By understanding the definition and purpose of a zinger, and incorporating it thoughtfully into your writing, you can truly master the art of crafting a memorable and impactful piece of writing.

Karis Ford is an educational blogger and volunteer. She has been involved in school and community activism for over 10 years. She has taught herself elementary and middle school math, English, and social media marketing. In her spare time, she also enjoys reading, cooking, and spending time with her family.

View all posts

• Daily Crossword
• Word Puzzle
• Word Finder
• Word of the Day
• Synonym of the Day
• Word of the Year
• Language stories
• All featured
• Gender and sexuality
• All pop culture
• Grammar Coach ™
• Writing hub
• Grammar essentials
• Commonly confused
• All writing tips
• Pop culture
• Writing tips

Did you mean zinger ?

Definition of 'zinger'

zinger in British English

Zinger in american english, examples of 'zinger' in a sentence zinger, trends of zinger.

View usage for: All Years Last 10 years Last 50 years Last 100 years Last 300 years

Browse alphabetically zinger

• zingiberaceous
• All ENGLISH words that begin with 'Z'

Quick word challenge

Quiz Review

Score: 0 / 5

Wordle Helper

Scrabble Tools

• Place order

Signposting words and Phrases to use in Essays

Every professor or instructor will tell you that they undoubtedly enjoy reading and grading an essay or academic task where signposting words and phrases have been used. This is a secret that only the top grade and talented students have discovered. It is the reason they score As.

Essays that have a logical flow, where signposting words and phrases have been used, are appealing to read. When you signpost, no one struggles to read through your essay, identify your thoughts, claims, counterclaims, and arguments. In the end, such essays achieve their intended purpose, which then earns you the best grade.

Any student who aspires to score the best grades for their essays must master the art of signposting. Not only in essays but also in other academic tasks, assignments, or homework. It is a skill that sets you miles ahead of the rest.

In this guide, we take you through the best practices of signposting using examples for illustration and deep understanding before giving you a list of signposting words and phrases.

What is signposting?

You are probably wondering, "what are signposts in writing?" Let us begin by defining signposting before we head on to focus on signpost examples. 

Signposting is a commonly used strategy when writing academic and professional papers. It refers to the use of phrases and words to guide readers through the content of a piece of written work such as an essay, research paper, term paper, proposal, or dissertation. It entails flagging the most significant parts of your arguments, signaling transitions, and clarifying any stakes of an argument.

Signposts are these words and phrases that help you articulate the structure of any given piece of writing to ensure that your writers flow with the ideas.

There are two classes of signposting: Major signposts and linking words and short phrases.

Major signposting entails the introduction , conclusion, and outlining of main arguments or the direction of arguments. It equally entails the use of opening phrases. On the other hand, linking words and short phrases encompass any connecting words that guide the readers through the main arguments by linking sentences, ideas, and paragraphs.

Example of signposting

To understand Biden's foreign policy for China, it is imperative to evaluate the policy direction of Trump's regime.

This example helps the reader to understand in advance that you will be taking them through the characteristics of Trump's foreign policy for China before exploring Biden's current foreign policy to China in a cross-comparative approach.

Another way to view the issue of global warming is'

In this example, you are trying to remind the reader that although you have covered some aspects of global warming, they should note another vital point.

How to Signpost in an Essay for more effortless Flow of Ideas

When you signpost, a reader whose mind is preoccupied can read your essay or piece of academic writing and understand your point without struggling. It is a bulletproof strategy that helps your readers comprehend each point. The readers can connect points, sentences, ideas, and paragraphs, which gives an ideal flow as they read.

Signposting also makes your writing enjoyable; you sound professional in your arguments. In addition, when you signpost, the structure of your essay, especially in the introduction, helps you present your arguments well.

Here are eight effective strategies , tips, and tricks you can use when signposting to write an essay that scores an A .

1. Use Verbs to Signpost

When introducing quotes or referring to the sources or references, use various verbs to signpost your readers that you are about to introduce a quote, then connect it to the main argument.

You can use verbs such as asserts, opines, contends, reasons, reports, concludes, demonstrates, claims, shows, concurs with, refutes, opposes, etc.

Be vigilant enough not to use the wrong verbs in a given context when using these verbs. Besides, ensure that you are precise. Use these verbs to endorse what the scholar said, refute or oppose what the scholar said, or compare the opinion of scholars on a given issue.

2. Use Retrospective Signposts to Reiterate

When writing an essay or dissertation, capturing your readers' attention becomes your ultimate goal. And while you capture their attention, you must also keep them motivated and engaged so they stick to your work.

One way to achieve this is by reminding the readers about the key points you have covered and where you are headed. You prepare your readers for what is coming.

You can use phrases such as "as is now evident," "as mentioned earlier," "in other words," "as a complement to the last point on," or "the main point is"

Using retrospective signposts can help you show how the previous points matter to the existing idea or argument. In addition, it helps the readers to take keen note of a point before introducing a new idea.

In most cases, you can do this at the end of paragraphs where you want to highlight the earlier point and expose its relevance to the essay question.

You can as well apply this strategy to your conclusion. Also, you can repeat complicated ideas, points, or arguments to avoid sparking controversy or creating abrupt surprises.

When you remind the readers about these key points, your intended direction, and your expected destination, you orient them through your reading to allow some good flow of ideas.

Repetition makes your readers get bored by reading something so many times. However, when you signpost these ideas, you help them see that you address a different point connected to the past ideas.

3. Effectively use Transitions

Transitions knit together ideas in an essay or academic writing task. Using transition words and phrases, you can link ideas in two sentences or paragraphs. You can use different transition words when writing, depending on your goal. Only ensure that your intention and the choice of a transition align.

You can illustrate your previous point using transitions such as 'for example,' 'for instance,' 'as an illustration,' or 'to further expound on.'

You can compare, show cause and consequence, or give additional points to what you have already covered. And when you use transitions, be wise enough not to overuse or place them for the sake of it.

Related Reading: How to write explosive compare and contrast essays.

4. Precisely use Signposts

Although signposting is intended for all the good reasons we have explained, your work will sound sloppy when abused. For instance, using words such as 'conversely' or 'however' in the wrong context makes you look foolish.

Resist any urge to sprinkle signposting words all over your written piece. Instead, you must be meticulous and link sentences, paragraphs, or ideas only when necessary.

Choose a transition or linking word that fits the context. For example, only use 'as a result' to signpost when the following idea is a consequence of an idea you previously wrote.

As usual, precise language will enable smooth and accurate communication with your audience; you must stick to it when writing your essay. 

Related Read: How to make good paragraphs in an essay.

5. Signpost in your introduction

 When signposting in the introduction, clearly elaborate:

• The overall aim of your essay, e.g., 'This essay argues'.'
• The main ideas you will discuss and in what order, e.g., 'First, second, third'.'
• The rationale of choosing your main argument for the topic, e.g., 'Given that'.' Or ''will form the key focus of this essay.'
• Quantify the content or aims of your essay, e.g., 'This essay discusses the three strategies'.'

In short, your introduction should present the essay's overall aim and share the points you discuss in the body paragraphs.

6. Signpost throughout the body paragraphs

You need to use paragraph breaks and subheadings to signpost through your essay. It is a way to keep the readers focused on the main points of your essay. However, you can only do this for long essays such as term papers, research papers, or dissertations.

Writing three to four sentences to effectively use paragraph breaks before starting another paragraph. Paragraph breaks are the single line space, indentation, or both that mark the end of one paragraph and the beginning of the next.

In your body paragraphs, you can tell your readers about specific points to come or what has been discussed already.

Example: Having discussed the overall direction of Trump's foreign policy, it is necessary to consider Biden's current policy.

You can equally use words and short phrases within the paragraphs. For example, you can use words such as 'Consequently,' 'as a result,' 'therefore,' 'alternatively,' or 'however' to signal direction.

7. Signpost in your conclusion

Like the introduction, the conclusion of an essay also plays a critical role - a signpost in your conclusion to bring some element of closure and close the loop for your readers.

To signpost well, look for the verbs you used in the introduction and use the same verbs in their past tense. For example,  "t his essay has discussed and concluded."

Ensure that your conclusion reminds the readers about the main points, arguments, and reasoning you have achieved in your essay and how your essay has answered the question.

A good essay outline should help you signpost ideas in your conclusion. That way, you can craft a conclusion that satisfies your readers' appetite.

8. Ensure that your topic is clear earlier on

Provide a rationale for choosing your topic early enough. Then, you have a few seconds to capture the attention of your readers, after which you either keep or lose their interest.

To have your readers engaged in reading your essay past the title, let the reader know the direction. Begin by writing a great hook , providing a detailed background, and explaining how the topic is relevant to your essay. Also, ensure that your main arguments are clear off the bat.

List of Signposting Words and Phrases for Essays

Now that you understand what it is, its significance, and various approaches to achieve it, let's have a quick look at the phrases and words or signposts that you can use in your essay.

Introducing new idea

• Firstly, secondly, thirdly'
• First, second, third'.
• The first/next/final section'
• The current debate'.
• The current issue'.

Adding similar points

• In addition
• On the same note

Specifying a particular idea

• Considering
• Specifically
• In particular
• More specifically
• In relation to
• In terms of
• With respect to

Giving examples or illustrating

• For instance
• For example
• As an illustration
• This can be explained by
• To further illustrate

Summarizing ideas

• To conclude
• As evident from the discussion
• As is clear from the discussion above
• To summarize
• In conclusion
• The main issue that is apparent
• The main points here
• It is clear that
• The strength of this approach

Making comparison

• On the one hand
• On the other hand
• Compared to
• In comparison
• In contrast
• This contrasts'
• This conflicts'
• This is contrary
• Another angle

Linking or developing a new idea

• Having said that'.
• Picking from the last point
• Having established
• To further understand'
• To elaborate further
• In addition to
• As well as'
• Another issue'
• Of equal importance
• Extending the argument further

Related Reading: How to write a compare and contrast essay.

Final Remarks

Signposting is a single ingredient that makes your essay stronger, more understandable, and more flowing. In addition, it improves the taste of your essay even when your instructor is in no good mood.

Using the signposting tips and tricks we have discussed can help you achieve so much, even when writing a short essay, as you would with a longer essay.

When creating a good flow, the instructor or professor can identify with your argument. You invite them to your world and keep them to the end of the essay. Even as you signpost, be meticulous just as you would with transition words. Ensure that you use it sparingly and as necessary.

We have expert essay writers who can write a researched, structured, and organized essay if you are struggling with your essay. Leave planning, researching, outlining, drafting, and revising an essay to our writers and receive a top-grade grade essay.

Need a Discount to Order?

15% off first order, what you get from us.

Plagiarism-free papers

Our papers are 100% original and unique to pass online plagiarism checkers.

Well-researched academic papers

Even when we say essays for sale, they meet academic writing conventions.

24/7 online support

Hit us up on live chat or Messenger for continuous help with your essays.

Easy communication with writers

Order essays and begin communicating with your writer directly and anonymously.

What Does Zing Mean? – Meaning, Uses and More

What Does Zing Mean?

The term zing originated in African American Vernacular English (AAVE) and has been prevalent in American street and youth culture for a significant period. It gained widespread recognition in the 2000s, particularly within black communities, and became even more politically charged following the Black Lives Matter movement in 2014. The term “zing” signifies being awakened or alert to matters concerning racial injustice. However, it has gradually been appropriated by right-wing individuals as an offensive term. The term has a multifaceted history and has undergone changes in its usage over time.

What Does Zing Mean From a Girl?

When a girl uses the term zing , it can have different meanings depending on the context. Here’s what you need to know:

Specific meaning from a girl : Girls may use “zing” to express excitement or enthusiasm about something. It can be used to describe a witty or clever remark, an impressive achievement, or an unexpected surprise. For example, a girl might say “That comeback was pure zing!” or “She really zinged him with her quick thinking.”

How girls use it : Girls often use “zing” in casual conversations with friends or online. It is a lighthearted and playful term that adds humor and energy to the conversation. Girls may also use “zing” as a way to show appreciation for someone’s wit or cleverness.

How to reply : If someone uses “zing” in a conversation with you, it’s best to respond with humor and playfulness. You can acknowledge their remark by laughing or responding with an equally witty comment. For example, you could say “Haha, that was a good one! You really zinged me there.”

It’s important to note that the meaning of “zing” can vary depending on the individual and the context in which it is used. Some girls may use it more frequently than others, while some may have their own unique interpretation of the term. As always, it’s best to pay attention to the specific context and tone of the conversation to fully understand how “zing” is being used.

• Girl A: Did you see Sarah’s comeback during the debate? It was epic!
• Girl B: Oh yeah, she really zinged him with her quick thinking. It was hilarious!
• Girl A: I just pulled off the perfect prank on my brother.
• Girl B: Nice! That’s some serious zing right there. He won’t see it coming!
• Girl A: Check out this meme I found. It’s so funny!
• Girl B: Haha, that’s pure zing ! I can’t stop laughing.
• Girl A: I just aced my math test!
• Girl B: Wow, you’re on fire! That’s some serious zing . Keep up the good work!
• Girl A: Guess what? I won first place in the talent show!
• Girl B: No way! That’s amazing! You totally zinged it on stage. Congrats!

What Does Zing Mean From a Guy?

When a guy uses the term zing , it can have similar meanings to when a girl uses it, but there may be some differences in usage and interpretation. Here’s what you need to know:

Similar meanings : Like girls, guys may use “zing” to express excitement or enthusiasm about something. It can be used to describe a clever or witty remark, an impressive achievement, or an unexpected surprise. For example, a guy might say “That joke had some serious zing!” or “He really zinged her with his quick wit.”

Complimenting appearance : Guys may also use “zing” as a compliment towards a girl’s appearance. It can be a way of acknowledging that she looks attractive or stylish. For example, a guy might say “You’re looking great today, total zing!”

Flirting : In some cases, guys may use “zing” as a playful way of flirting with a girl. It can be a lighthearted and fun way of showing interest or teasing. For example, a guy might say “You always bring the zing wherever you go.”

Different usage : While the overall meaning of “zing” may be similar for both guys and girls, the specific ways in which it is used may vary. Guys may use it more sparingly or in different contexts compared to girls. They may also have their own unique interpretations of the term.

If a guy uses “zing” in conversation with you, it’s best to pay attention to the context and tone of the conversation to understand how he is using it. If it seems like a compliment or playful flirtation, you can respond with humor and playfulness. If you’re unsure about his intentions, you can always ask for clarification or respond in a friendly and lighthearted manner.

• Guy 1: Just finished my first marathon!
• Guy 2: Dude, that’s incredible! You totally zinged it!
• Guy 1: Check out this new recipe I tried. It’s a spicy chicken dish.
• Guy 2: Nice! I bet it has some serious zing to it. Can’t wait to try it!
• Guy 1: I aced my math test today!
• Guy 2: Way to go, man! You really zinged that test. Keep up the good work!
• Guy 1: Just got a promotion at work!
• Guy 2: That’s awesome, bro! You’re on fire! Zing ing your way up the ladder.
• Guy: I finally asked her out and she said yes!
• Friend: No way! You’ve got some serious zing . Congrats, man!

Origin of Zing

The word “zing” originated in African American Vernacular English (AAVE) and has been prevalent in American street and youth culture for a significant period. It gained widespread recognition in the 2000s, particularly within black communities, and became even more politically charged following the Black Lives Matter movement in 2014. The term “zing” signifies being awakened or alert to matters concerning racial injustice. However, it has gradually been appropriated by right-wing individuals as an offensive term. The term has a multifaceted history and has undergone changes in its usage over time.

Frequently Asked Questions

Slangs similar to zing.

Aware, alert, conscious, engaged, informed, and empathetic are similar to “zing” because they all involve being aware, awake, and attentive to social and racial issues, as well as actively participating in discussions and actions related to justice and understanding the feelings of others who face injustices. These terms are all connected to being socially and racially conscious and engaged.

Is Zing A Bad Word?

No, “zing” is not a bad word or vulgar word. It is a slang term that means “owned” or to have “got” someone, often used after making a witty or insulting comment. It originated from African American Vernacular English and has been used in American street and youth culture for a long time. It can also be used in a positive way to describe a witty or clever remark.

Is Zing a Typo or Misspelling?

No, “zing” is not a misspelling or typo. It is a word that originated in African American Vernacular English (AAVE) and has been used in American street and youth culture for a long time. It gained political significance after the Black Lives Matter movement in 2014.

You may also like

What Does Oy Mean? – Meaning, Uses and More

What Does Pud Mean? – Meaning, Uses and More

What Does Wapo Mean? – Meaning, Uses and More

What Does Cus Mean? – Meaning, Uses and More

Find anything you save across the site in your account

Don’t Believe What They’re Telling You About Misinformation

By Manvir Singh

Millions of people have watched Mike Hughes die. It happened on February 22, 2020, not far from Highway 247 near the Mojave Desert city of Barstow, California. A homemade rocket ship with Hughes strapped in it took off from a launching pad mounted on a truck. A trail of steam billowed behind the rocket as it swerved and then shot upward, a detached parachute unfurling ominously in its wake. In a video recorded by the journalist Justin Chapman, Hughes disappears into the sky, a dark pinpoint in a vast, uncaring blueness. But then the rocket reappears and hurtles toward the ground, crashing, after ten long seconds, in a dusty cloud half a mile away.

Hughes was among the best-known proponents of Flat Earth theory , which insists that our planet is not spherical but a Frisbee-like disk. He had built and flown in two rockets before, one in 2014 and another in 2018, and he planned to construct a “rockoon,” a combination rocket and balloon, that would carry him above the upper atmosphere, where he could see the Earth’s flatness for himself. The 2020 takeoff, staged for the Science Channel series “Homemade Astronauts,” was supposed to take him a mile up—not high enough to see the Earth’s curvature but hypeworthy enough to garner more funding and attention.

Flat Earth theory may sound like one of those deliberately far-fetched satires, akin to Birds Aren’t Real, but it has become a cultic subject for anti-scientific conspiratorialists, growing entangled with movements such as QAnon and COVID -19 skepticism. In “ Off the Edge: Flat Earthers, Conspiracy Culture, and Why People Will Believe Anything ” (Algonquin), the former Daily Beast reporter Kelly Weill writes that the tragedy awakened her to the sincerity of Flat Earthers’ convictions. After investigating the Flat Earth scene and following Hughes, she had figured that, “on some subconscious level,” Hughes knew the Earth wasn’t flat. His death set her straight: “I was wrong. Flat Earthers are as serious as your life.”

Weill isn’t the only one to fear the effects of false information. In January, the World Economic Forum released a report showing that fourteen hundred and ninety international experts rated “misinformation and disinformation” the leading global risk of the next two years, surpassing war, migration, and climatic catastrophe. A stack of new books echoes their concerns. In “ Falsehoods Fly: Why Misinformation Spreads and How to Stop It ” (Columbia), Paul Thagard, a philosopher at the University of Waterloo, writes that “misinformation is threatening medicine, science, politics, social justice, and international relations, affecting problems such as vaccine hesitancy, climate change denial, conspiracy theories, claims of racial inferiority, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine .” In “ Foolproof: Why Misinformation Infects Our Minds and How to Build Immunity ” (Norton), Sander van der Linden, a social-psychology professor at Cambridge, warns that “viruses of the mind” disseminated by false tweets and misleading headlines pose “serious threats to the integrity of elections and democracies worldwide.” Or, as the M.I.T. political scientist Adam J. Berinsky puts it in “ Political Rumors: Why We Accept Misinformation and How to Fight It ” (Princeton), “a democracy where falsehoods run rampant can only result in dysfunction.”

Most Americans seem to agree with these theorists of human credulity. Following the 2020 Presidential race, sixty per cent thought that misinformation had a major impact on the outcome, and, to judge from a recent survey, even more believe that artificial intelligence will exacerbate the problem in this year’s contest. The Trump and the DeSantis campaigns both used deepfakes to sully their rivals. Although they justified the fabrications as transparent parodies, some experts anticipate a “tsunami of misinformation,” in the words of Oren Etzioni, a professor emeritus at the University of Washington and the first C.E.O. of the Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence. “The ingredients are there, and I am completely terrified,” he told the Associated Press.

The fear of misinformation hinges on assumptions about human suggestibility. “Misinformation, conspiracy theories, and other dangerous ideas, latch on to the brain and insert themselves deep into our consciousness,” van der Linden writes in “Foolproof.” “They infiltrate our thoughts, feelings, and even our memories.” Thagard puts it more plainly: “People have a natural tendency to believe what they hear or read, which amounts to gullibility.”

But do the credulity theorists have the right account of what’s going on? Folks like Mike Hughes aren’t gullible in the sense that they’ll believe anything. They seem to reject scientific consensus, after all. Partisans of other well-known conspiracies (the government is run by lizard people; a cabal of high-level pedophilic Democrats operates out of a neighborhood pizza parlor) are insusceptible to the assurances of the mainstream media. Have we been misinformed about the power of misinformation?

In 2006, more than five hundred skeptics met at an Embassy Suites hotel near O’Hare Airport, in Chicago, to discuss conspiracy. They listened to presentations on mass hypnosis, the melting point of steel, and how to survive the collapse of the existing world order. They called themselves many things, including “truth activists” and “9/11 skeptics,” although the name that would stick, and which observers would use for years afterward, was Truthers.

The Truthers held that the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center were masterminded by the White House to expand government power and enable military and security industries to profit from the war on terror. According to an explanation posted by 911truth.org, a group that helped sponsor the conference, George W. Bush and his allies gagged and intimidated whistle-blowers, mailed anthrax to opponents in the Senate, and knowingly poisoned the inhabitants of lower Manhattan. On that basis, Truthers concluded, “the administration does consider the lives of American citizens to be expendable on behalf of certain interests.”

Link copied

The Truthers, in short, maintained that the government had gone to extreme measures, including killing thousands of its own citizens, in order to carry out and cover up a conspiracy. And yet the same Truthers advertised the conference online and met in a place where they could easily be surveilled. Speakers’ names were posted on the Internet along with videos, photographs, and short bios. The organizers created a publicly accessible forum to discuss next steps, and a couple of attendees spoke to a reporter from the Times , despite the mainstream media’s ostensible complicity in the coverup. By the logic of their own theories, the Truthers were setting themselves up for assassination.

Their behavior demonstrates a paradox of belief. Action is supposed to follow belief, and yet beliefs, even fervently espoused ones, sometimes exist in their own cognitive cage, with little influence over behavior. Take the “Pizzagate” story, in which Hillary Clinton and her allies ran a child sex ring from the basement of a D.C. pizzeria. In the months surrounding the 2016 Presidential election, a staggering number of Americans—millions, by some estimates—endorsed the account, and, in December of that year, a North Carolina man charged into the restaurant, carrying an assault rifle. Van der Linden and Berinsky both use the incident as evidence of misinformation’s violent implications. But they’re missing the point: what’s really striking is how anomalous that act was. The pizzeria received menacing phone calls, even death threats, but the most common response from believers, aside from liking posts, seems to have been leaving negative Yelp reviews.

That certain deeply held beliefs seem insulated from other inferences isn’t peculiar to conspiracy theorists; it’s the experience of regular churchgoers. Catholics maintain that the Sacrament is the body of Christ, yet no one expects the bread to taste like raw flesh or accuses fellow-parishioners of cannibalism. In “ How God Becomes Real ” (2020), the Stanford anthropologist T. M. Luhrmann recounts evangelical Christians’ frustrations with their own beliefs. They thought less about God when they were not in church. They confessed to not praying. “I remember a man weeping in front of a church over not having sufficient faith that God would replace the job he had lost,” Luhrmann writes. The paradox of belief is one of Christianity’s “clearest” messages, she observes: “You may think you believe in God, but really you don’t. You don’t take God seriously enough. You don’t act as if he’s there.” It’s right out of Mark 9:24: “Lord, I believe; help my unbelief!”

The paradox of belief has been the subject of scholarly investigation; puzzling it out promises new insights about the human psyche. Some of the most influential work has been by the French philosopher and cognitive scientist Dan Sperber. Born into a Jewish family in France in 1942, during the Nazi Occupation, Sperber was smuggled to Switzerland when he was three months old. His parents returned to France three years later, and raised him as an atheist while imparting a respect for all religious-minded people, including his Hasidic Jewish ancestors.

The exercise of finding rationality in the seemingly irrational became an academic focus for Sperber in the nineteen-seventies. Staying with the Dorze people in southern Ethiopia, he noticed that they made assertions that they seemed both to believe and not to believe. People told him, for example, that “the leopard is a Christian animal who observes the fasts of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.” Nevertheless, the average Dorze man guarded his livestock on fast days just as much as on other days. “Not because he suspects some leopards of being bad Christians,” Sperber wrote, “but because he takes it as true both that leopards fast and that they are always dangerous.”

Sperber concluded that there are two kinds of beliefs. The first he has called “factual” beliefs. Factual beliefs—such as the belief that chairs exist and that leopards are dangerous—guide behavior and tolerate little inconsistency; you can’t believe that leopards do and do not eat livestock. The second category he has called “symbolic” beliefs. These beliefs might feel genuine, but they’re cordoned off from action and expectation. We are, in turn, much more accepting of inconsistency when it comes to symbolic beliefs; we can believe, say, that God is all-powerful and good while allowing for the existence of evil and suffering.

In a masterly new book, “ Religion as Make-Believe ” (Harvard), Neil Van Leeuwen, a philosopher at Georgia State University, returns to Sperber’s ideas with notable rigor. He analyzes beliefs with a taxonomist’s care, classifying different types and identifying the properties that distinguish them. He proposes that humans represent and use factual beliefs differently from symbolic beliefs, which he terms “credences.” Factual beliefs are for modelling reality and behaving optimally within it. Because of their function in guiding action, they exhibit features like “involuntariness” (you can’t decide to adopt them) and “evidential vulnerability” (they respond to evidence). Symbolic beliefs, meanwhile, largely serve social ends, not epistemic ones, so we can hold them even in the face of contradictory evidence.

One of Van Leeuwen’s insights is that people distinguish between different categories of belief in everyday speech. We say we “believe” symbolic ones but that we “think” factual ones are true. He has run ingenious experiments showing that you can manipulate how people talk about beliefs by changing the environment in which they’re expressed or sustained. Tell participants that a woman named Sheila sets up a shrine to Elvis Presley and plays songs on his birthday, and they will more often say that she “believes” Elvis is alive. But tell them that Sheila went to study penguins in Antarctica in 1977, and missed the news of his death, and they’ll say she “thinks” he’s still around. As the German sociologist Georg Simmel recognized more than a century ago, religious beliefs seem to express commitments—we believe in God the way we believe in a parent or a loved one, rather than the way we believe chairs exist. Perhaps people who traffic in outlandish conspiracies don’t so much believe them as believe in them.

Van Leeuwen’s book complements a 2020 volume by Hugo Mercier, “ Not Born Yesterday .” Mercier, a cognitive scientist at the École Normale Supérieure who studied under Sperber, argues that worries about human gullibility overlook how skilled we are at acquiring factual beliefs. Our understanding of reality matters, he notes. Get it wrong, and the consequences can be disastrous. On top of that, people have a selfish interest in manipulating one another. As a result, human beings have evolved a tool kit of psychological adaptations for evaluating information—what he calls “open vigilance mechanisms.” Where a credulity theorist like Thagard insists that humans tend to believe anything, Mercier shows that we are careful when adopting factual beliefs, and instinctively assess the quality of information, especially by tracking the reliability of sources.

Van Leeuwen and Mercier agree that many beliefs are not best interpreted as factual ones, although they lay out different reasons for why this might be. For Van Leeuwen, a major driver is group identity. Beliefs often function as badges: the stranger and more unsubstantiated the better. Religions, he notes, define membership on the basis of unverifiable or even unintelligible beliefs: that there is one God; that there is reincarnation; that this or that person was a prophet; that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are separate yet one. Mercier, in his work, has focussed more on justification. He says that we have intuitions—that vaccination is bad, for example, or that certain politicians can’t be trusted—and then collect stories that defend our positions. Still, both authors treat symbolic beliefs as socially strategic expressions.

After Mike Hughes’s death, a small debate broke out over the nature of his belief. His publicist, Darren Shuster, said that Hughes never really believed in a flat Earth. “It was a P.R. stunt,” he told Vice News. “We used the attention to get sponsorships and it kept working over and over again.” Space.com dug up an old interview corroborating Shuster’s statements. “This flat Earth has nothing to do with the steam rocket launches,” Hughes told the site in 2019. “It never did, it never will. I’m a daredevil!”

Perhaps it made sense that it was just a shtick. Hughes did death-defying stunts years before he joined the Flat Earthers. He was born in Oklahoma City in 1956 to an auto-mechanic father who enjoyed racing cars. At the age of twelve, Hughes was racing on his own, and not long afterward he was riding in professional motorcycle competitions. In 1996, he got a job driving limousines, but his dream of becoming the next Evel Knievel persisted; in 2002, he drove a Lincoln Town Car off a ramp and flew a hundred and three feet, landing him in Guinness World Records.

When Hughes first successfully launched a rocket, in 2014, he had never talked about the shape of the planet. In 2015, when he co-ran a Kickstarter campaign to fund the next rocket flight, the stated motivation was stardom, not science: “Mad Mike Hughes always wanted to be famous so much that he just decided one day to build a steam rocket and set the world record.” He got two backers and three hundred and ten dollars. Shortly afterward, he joined the Flat Earth community and tied his crusade to theirs. The community supported his new fund-raising effort, attracting more than eight thousand dollars. From there, his fame grew, earning him features in a documentary (“Rocketman,” from 2019) and that Science Channel series. Aligning with Flat Earthers clearly paid off.

Not everyone believes that he didn’t believe, however. Waldo Stakes, Hughes’s landlord and rocket-construction buddy, wrote on Facebook that “Mike was a real flat earther,” pointing to the “dozens of books on the subject” he owned, and said that Hughes lost money hosting a conference for the community. Another of Hughes’s friends told Kelly Weill that Flat Earth theory “started out as a marketing approach,” but that once it “generated awareness and involvement . . . it became something to him.”

The debate over Hughes’s convictions centers on the premise that a belief is either sincere or strategic, genuine or sham. That’s a false dichotomy. Indeed, the social functions of symbolic beliefs—functions such as signalling group identity—seem best achieved when the beliefs feel earnest. A Mormon who says that Joseph Smith was a prophet but secretly thinks he was a normal guy doesn’t strike us as a real Mormon. In fact, the evolutionary theorist Robert Trivers argued in “ Deceit and Self-Deception ” (2011) that we trick ourselves in order to convince others. Our minds are maintaining two representations of reality: there’s one that feels true and that we publicly advocate, and there’s another that we use to effectively interact with the world.

The idea of self-deception might seem like a stretch; Mercier has expressed skepticism about the theory. But it reconciles what appear to be contradictory findings. On the one hand, some research suggests that people’s beliefs in misinformation are authentic. In “Political Rumors,” for example, Berinsky describes experiments he conducted suggesting that people truly believe that Barack Obama is a Muslim and that the U.S. government allowed the 9/11 attacks to happen. “People by and large say what they mean,” he concludes.

On the other hand, there’s research implying that many false beliefs are little more than cheap talk. Put money on the table, and people suddenly see the light. In an influential paper published in 2015, a team led by the political scientist John Bullock found sizable differences in how Democrats and Republicans thought about politicized topics, like the number of casualties in the Iraq War. Paying respondents to be accurate, which included rewarding “don’t know” responses over wrong ones, cut the differences by eighty per cent. A series of experiments published in 2023 by van der Linden and three colleagues replicated the well-established finding that conservatives deem false headlines to be true more often than liberals—but found that the difference drops by half when people are compensated for accuracy. Some studies have reported smaller or more inconsistent effects, but the central point still stands. There may be people who believe in fake news the way they believe in leopards and chairs, but underlying many genuine-feeling endorsements is an understanding that they’re not exactly factual.

Van der Linden, Berinsky, and Thagard all offer ways to fight fabrication. But, because they treat misinformation as a problem of human gullibility, the remedies they propose tend to focus on minor issues, while scanting the larger social forces that drive the phenomenon. Consider van der Linden’s prescription. He devotes roughly a third of “Foolproof” to his group’s research on “prebunking,” or psychological inoculation. The idea is to present people with bogus information before they come across it in the real world and then expose its falsity—a kind of epistemic vaccination. Such prebunking can target specific untruths, or it can be “broad-spectrum,” as when people are familiarized with an array of misinformation techniques, from emotional appeals to conspiratorial language.

Prebunking has received an extraordinary amount of attention. If you’ve ever read a headline about a vaccine against fake news, it was probably about van der Linden’s work. His team has collaborated with Google, WhatsApp, the Department of Homeland Security, and the British Prime Minister’s office; similar interventions have popped up on Twitter (now X). In “Foolproof,” van der Linden reviews evidence that prebunking makes people better at identifying fake headlines. Yet nothing is mentioned about effects on their actual behavior. Does prebunking affect medical decisions? Does it make someone more willing to accept electoral outcomes? We’re left wondering.

The evidential gap is all the trickier because little research exists in the first place showing that misinformation affects behavior by changing beliefs. Berinsky acknowledges this in “Political Rumors” when he writes that “few scholars have established a direct causal link” between rumors and real-world outcomes. Does the spread of misinformation influence, say, voting decisions? Van der Linden admits, “Contrary to much of the commentary you may find in the popular media, scientists have been extremely skeptical.”

So it’s possible that we’ve been misinformed about how to fight misinformation. What about the social conditions that make us susceptible? Van der Linden tells us that people are more often drawn to conspiracy theories when they feel “uncertain and powerless,” and regard themselves as “marginalized victims.” Berinsky cites scholarship suggesting that conspiratorial rumors flourish among people who experience “a lack of interpersonal trust” and “a sense of alienation.” In his own research, he found that a big predictor of accepting false rumors is agreeing with statements such as “Politicians do not care much about what they say, so long as they get elected.” A recent study found a strong correlation between the prevalence of conspiracy beliefs and levels of governmental corruption; in those beliefs, Americans fell midway between people from Denmark and Sweden and people from middle-income countries such as Mexico and Turkey, reflecting a fraying sense of institutional integrity. More than Russian bots or click-hungry algorithms, a crisis of trust and legitimacy seems to lie behind the proliferation of paranoid falsehoods.

Findings like these require that we rethink what misinformation represents. As Dan Kahan, a legal scholar at Yale, notes, “Misinformation is not something that happens to the mass public but rather something that its members are complicit in producing.” That’s why thoughtful scholars—including the philosopher Daniel Williams and the experimental psychologist Sacha Altay—encourage us to see misinformation more as a symptom than as a disease. Unless we address issues of polarization and institutional trust, they say, we’ll make little headway against an endless supply of alluring fabrications.

From this perspective, railing against social media for manipulating our zombie minds is like cursing the wind for blowing down a house we’ve allowed to go to rack and ruin. It distracts us from our collective failures, from the conditions that degrade confidence and leave much of the citizenry feeling disempowered. By declaring that the problem consists of “irresponsible senders and gullible receivers,” in Thagard’s words, credulity theorists risk ignoring the social pathologies that cause people to become disenchanted and motivate them to rally around strange new creeds.

Mike Hughes was among the disenchanted. Sure, he used Flat Earth theory to become a celebrity, but its anti-institutionalist tone also spoke to him. In 2018, while seeking funding and attention for his next rocket ride, he self-published a book titled “ ‘Mad’ Mike Hughes: The Tell All Tale.” The book brims with outlandish, unsupported assertions—that George H. W. Bush was a pedophile, say—but they’re interspersed with more grounded frustrations. He saw a government commandeered by the greedy few, one that stretched the truth to start a war in Iraq, and that seemed concerned less with spreading freedom and more with funnelling tax dollars into the pockets of defense contractors. “You think about those numbers for a second,” he wrote, of the amount of money spent on the military. “We have homelessness in this country. We could pay off everyone’s mortgages. And we can eliminate sales tax. Everyone would actually be free.”

Hughes wasn’t a chump. He just felt endlessly lied to. As he wrote near the end of his book, “I want my coffee and I don’t want any whipped cream on top of it, you know what I mean? I just want this raw truth.” ♦

New Yorker Favorites

Why facts don’t change our minds .

The tricks rich people use to avoid taxes .

The man who spent forty-two years at the Beverly Hills Hotel pool .

How did polyamory get so popular ?

The ghostwriter who regrets working for Donald Trump .

Snoozers are, in fact, losers .

Fiction by Jamaica Kincaid: “Girl”

Sign up for our daily newsletter to receive the best stories from The New Yorker .

By signing up, you agree to our User Agreement and Privacy Policy & Cookie Statement . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

By Rebecca Mead

By Gideon Lewis-Kraus

By Elizabeth Kolbert

By Louis Menand

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player
• Official Biz
• Behind The Stories
• Station Stories
• I Heart NPR

From NPR President and CEO Katherine Maher: Thoughts on our mission and our work

The message below was sent by NPR's President and CEO to all staff:

This has been a long week. I'll apologize in advance for the length of this note, and for it being the first way so many of you hear from me on more substantive issues. Thanks for bearing with me, as there's a lot that should be said.

I joined this organization because public media is essential for an informed public. At its best, our work can help shape and illuminate the very sense of what it means to have a shared public identity as fellow Americans in this sprawling and enduringly complex nation.

NPR's service to this aspirational mission was called in question this week, in two distinct ways. The first was a critique of the quality of our editorial process and the integrity of our journalists. The second was a criticism of our people on the basis of who we are.

Asking a question about whether we're living up to our mission should always be fair game: after all, journalism is nothing if not hard questions. Questioning whether our people are serving our mission with integrity, based on little more than the recognition of their identity, is profoundly disrespectful, hurtful, and demeaning.

It is deeply simplistic to assert that the diversity of America can be reduced to any particular set of beliefs, and faulty reasoning to infer that identity is determinative of one's thoughts or political leanings. Each of our colleagues are here because they are excellent, accomplished professionals with an intense commitment to our work: we are stronger because of the work we do together, and we owe each other our utmost respect. We fulfill our mission best when we look and sound like the country we serve.

NPR has some of the finest reporters, editors, and producers in journalism. Our reporting and programming is not only consistently recognized and rewarded for its quality, depth, and nuance; but at its best, it makes a profound difference in people's lives. Parents, patients, veterans, students, and so many more have directly benefited from the impact of our journalism. People come to work here because they want to report, and report deeply, in service to an informed public, and to do work that makes a difference.

This is the work of our people, and our people represent America, our irreducibly complex nation. Given the very real challenges of covering the myriad perspectives, motivations, and interests of a nation of more than 330 million very different people, we succeed through our diversity. This is a bedrock institutional commitment, hard-won, and hard-protected.

We recognize that this work is a public trust, one established by Congress more than 50 years ago with the creation of the public broadcasting system. In order to hold that trust, we owe it our continued, rigorous accountability. When we are asked questions about who we serve and how that influences our editorial choices, we should be prepared to respond. It takes great strength to be comfortable with turning the eye of journalistic accountability inwards, but we are a news organization built on a foundation of robust editorial standards and practices, well-constructed to withstand the hardest of gazes.

It is true that our audiences have unquestionably changed over the course of the past two decades. There is much to be proud of here: through difficult, focused work, we have earned new trust from younger, more diverse audiences, particularly in our digital experiences. These audiences constitute new generations of listeners, are more representative of America, and our changing patterns of listening, viewing, and reading.

At the same time, we've seen some concerning changes: the diffusion of drivetime, an audience skewing further away in age from the general population, and significant changes in political affiliations have all been reflected in the changing composition of our broadcast radio audiences. Of course, some of these changes are representative of trends outside our control — but we owe it to our mission and public interest mandate to ask, what levers do we hold?

A common quality of exceptional organizations is humility and the ability to learn. We owe it to our public interest mandate to ask ourselves: could we serve more people, from broader audiences across America? Years ago we began asking this question as part of our North Star work to earn the trust of new audiences. And more recently, this is why the organization has taken up the call of audience data, awareness, and research: so we can better understand who we are serving, and who we are not.

Our initial research has shown that curiosity is the unifying throughline for people who enjoy NPR's journalism and programming. Curiosity to know more, to learn, to experience, to change. This is a compelling insight, as curiosity only further expands the universe of who we might serve. It's a cross-cutting trait, pretty universal to all people, and found in just about every demographic in every part of the nation.

As an organization, we must invest in the resources that will allow us to be as curious as the audiences we serve, and expand our efforts to understand how to serve our nation better. We recently completed in-depth qualitative research with a wide range of listeners across the country, learning in detail what they think about NPR and how they view our journalism. Over the next two years we plan to conduct audience research across our entire portfolio of programming, in order to give ourselves the insight we need to extend the depth and breadth of our service to the American public.

It is also essential that we listen closely to the insights and experiences of our colleagues at our 248 Member organizations. Their presence across America is foundational to our mission: serving and engaging audiences that are as diverse as our nation: urban and rural, liberal and conservative, rich and poor, often together in one community.

We will begin by implementing an idea that has been proposed for some time: establishing quarterly NPR Network-wide editorial planning and review meetings, as a complement to our other channels for Member station engagement. These will serve as a venue for NPR newsroom leadership to hear directly from Member organization editorial leaders on how our journalism serves the needs of audiences in their communities, and a coordination mechanism for Network-wide editorial planning and newsgathering. We're starting right away: next week we plan to invite Members to join us for an initial scoping conversation.

And in the spirit of learning from our own work, we will introduce regular opportunities to connect what our research is telling us about our audiences to the practical application of how we're serving them. As part of the ongoing unification of our Content division, Interim Chief Content Officer, Edith Chapin, will establish a broad-based, rotating group that will meet monthly to review our coverage across all platforms. Some professions call this a retro, a braintrust, a 'crit,' or tuning session — this is an opportunity to take a break from the relentless pressure of the clock in order to reflect on how we're meeting our mandate, what we're catching and what we're missing, and learn from our colleagues in a climate of respectful, open-minded discussion.

The spirit of our founding newsroom and network was one of experimentation, creativity, and direct connection with our listeners across America. Our values are a direct outgrowth of this moment: the independence of a public trust, the responsibility to capture the voice and spirit of a nation, a willingness to push boundaries to tell the stories that matter. We're no strangers to change, continuously evolving as our network has grown, our programming has expanded, and our audiences have diversified — and as we look to a strategy that captures these values and opportunities, the future holds more change yet.

Two final thoughts on our mission:

I once heard missions like ours described as asymptotic — we can see our destination and we strive for it, but may never fully meet it. The value is in the continued effort: the challenge stretches on toward infinity and we follow, ever closer. Some people might find that exhausting. I suspect they don't work here. I suspect that you do because you find that challenge a means to constantly renew your work, and to reinfuse our mission with meaning as our audiences and world continues to change.

The strongest, most effective, and enduring missions are those that are owned far beyond the walls of their institution. Our staff, our Member stations, our donors, our listeners and readers, our ardent fans, even our loyal opposition all have a part to play: each of us come to the work because we believe in it, even as we each may have different perspectives on how we succeed. Every person I have met so far in my three weeks here has shown me how they live our mission every day, in their work and in their contributions to the community.

Continuing to uphold our excellence with confidence, having inclusive conversations that bridge perspectives, and learning more about the audiences we serve in order to continue to grow and thrive, adding more light to the illumination of who we are as a shared body public: I look forward to how we will do this work together.

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.

Advertisement

Iran’s Attacks Bring Long Shadow War With Israel Into the Open

The volley of drones and missiles was the first time that Tehran directly attacked Israel from its own territory, one expert said.

• Share full article

By Cassandra Vinograd

• Published April 14, 2024 Updated April 18, 2024

Follow live updates on Israeli military strikes in Iran.

For decades, Israel and Iran have fought a shadow war across the Middle East , trading attacks by land, sea, air and in cyberspace. The barrage of drones and missiles Iran launched at Israel on Saturday — though nearly all were shot down or intercepted — represented a watershed in the conflict.

It was the first time that Iran directly attacked Israel from its own territory, according to Ahron Bregman, a political scientist and expert in Middle East security issues at King’s College in London, who called it a “historic event.”

Iran has largely used foreign proxies such as Lebanon’s Hezbollah militia to strike Israeli interests, while targeted assassinations of Iranian military leaders and nuclear scientists have been a key part of Israel’s strategy. Here is a recent history of the conflict:

August 2019: An Israeli airstrike killed two Iranian-trained militants in Syria, a drone set off a blast near a Hezbollah office in Lebanon and an airstrike in Qaim, Iraq, killed a commander of an Iran-backed Iraqi militia. Israel accused Iran at the time of trying to establish an overland arms-supply line through Iraq and northern Syria to Lebanon, and analysts said the strikes were aimed at stopping Iran and signaling to its proxies that Israel would not tolerate a fleet of smart missiles on its borders.

January 2020: Israel greeted with satisfaction the assassination of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani , the commander of the foreign-facing arm of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, in an American drone strike in Baghdad.

Iran hit back by attacking two bases in Iraq that housed American troops with a barrage of missiles, wounding about 100 U.S. military personnel .

2021-22: In July 2021, an oil tanker managed by an Israeli-owned shipping company was attacked off the coast of Oman, killing two crew members, according to the company and three Israeli officials. Two of the officials said that the attack appeared to have been carried out by Iranian drones.

Iran did not explicitly claim or deny responsibility, but a state-owned television channel described the episode as a response to an Israeli strike in Syria.

In November 2021, Israel killed Iran’s top nuclear scientist, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh , and followed up with the assassination of a Revolutionary Guards commander, Col. Sayad Khodayee , in May 2022.

December 2023: After Israel’s bombardment of Gaza began in response to the Oct. 7 Hamas-led assault, Iranian-backed militias stepped up their own attacks . And late last year, Iran accused Israel of killing a high-level military figure, Brig. Gen. Sayyed Razi Mousavi , in a missile strike in Syria.

A senior adviser to the Revolutionary Guards, General Mousavi was described as having been a close associate of General Suleimani and was said to have helped oversee the shipment of arms to Hezbollah. Israel, adopting its customary stance, declined to comment directly on whether it was behind General Mousavi’s death.

January 2024: An explosion in a suburb of Beirut, Lebanon, killed Saleh al-Arouri , a Hamas leader, along with two commanders from that group’s armed wing, the first assassination of a top Hamas official outside the West Bank and Gaza in recent years. Officials from Hamas, Lebanon and the United States ascribed the blast to Israel , which did not publicly confirm involvement.

Hezbollah, which receives major support from Iran, stepped up its assaults on Israel after Mr. al-Arouri’s death. Israel’s military hit back at Hezbollah in Lebanon, killing several of the group’s commanders .

March and April: An Israeli drone strike hit a car in southern Lebanon, killing at least one person. Israel’s military said it had killed the deputy commander of Hezbollah’s rocket and missile unit. Hezbollah acknowledged the death of a man, Ali Abdulhassan Naim, but did not provide further details.

The same day, airstrikes killed soldiers near Aleppo, northern Syria, in what appeared to be one of the heaviest Israeli attacks in the country in years. The strikes killed 36 Syrian soldiers, seven Hezbollah fighters and a Syrian from a pro-Iran militia, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a British-based group that tracks Syria’s civil war.

Israel’s military did not claim responsibility. But the country’s defense minister, Yoav Gallant, wrote on social media, “We will pursue Hezbollah every place it operates and we will expand the pressure and the pace of the attacks.”

Three days later, strikes on an Iranian Embassy building in Damascus killed three top Iranian commanders and four officers, an attack Iran blamed on Israel.

Matthew Mpoke Bigg contributed reporting.