Headlines and VO patrol

From this week's reading in the book "Advancing the story", I was told how critical a good headline is to invite readers, especially on the news web sites. Before using a good writing, good web extra to impress audience, we need to persuade them to click on our stories first.
Headline seems less important when we do stories for broadcast. Our audience doesn't pay that much of attention to the headline popping up as a super at the bottom of the screen, neither do I. For that media, good sound bites, good visuals, good writing and good structure are of most importance. But when it comes to Internet, we really need to decorate the headline to attract eyeballs.
In the book, the author says the best headline should be straightforward, using action verbs and indicating exactly what the story is about. Here are some examples I found:

Counties hike sales tax, feds hike tobacco tax (KOMO)
Valley smokers fume over tobacco tax hike (KBCI)
Tobacco Tax Increase Hits Smoke Shops Hard (KVEX)
New Tax Causes Tobacco Costs To Skyrocket (WFSB)
Tobacco users stockpile products before new tax (Cherokee Phoenix)
Tobacco Tax Puts People and Businesses Up In Smoke (KFSM)
New taxes on tobacco to burn big hole in consumers’ pockets (Youngstown Vindicator)

Which headline appears most eyecatching to you? As to me, I am going to click on the last two ones. Neither are they explicit about the content, nor are they lame.

Another group of headlines about dirt bikes and lead ban:

Lead rules unfairly target dirt bikes (GoErie)
Fears of lead in paint and batteries stall kids' dirt bike sales
Lead law eats at kid racers (Online Athens)
Lead ban goes overboard on small motorcycles, ATVs (Mid Columbia Tri City Herald)

The first one and the last one have almost the same meaning, but are put in different ways. They are both subjective, going against the lead law. But I prefer "goes overboard" to "unfairly". It is not so directing, but conveying the same load.

Part 2.
I have finished my two VO patrol shifts at KOMU, which went pretty smoothly. I arrived at the station at least one hour earlier to get geared up. The attempt paid off permitting me more time to write and edit, which is always good.

When I did the second story about zootoo.com's contest, I set up an interview with the two zootoo.com girls in a local restaurant. Along with them are staff from Central Missouri Humane Society and also a driver from Toyota, which raffle off a FJ Cruiser to benefit the shelter. And when I was setting up the camera, the driver forced me to make the Toyota Cruiser as the background. The lady from CMHS didn't say a word about that, just standing aside watching. I was so reluctant and tried to persuade him with my professional points and concerns. The confrontation ends up with my compromise and anger.

What should I do when I encounter this kind of situation next time? Does the interviewee have the right to choose a background, esp when it works as an advertisement?