Headlines have never made me watch ads or accept cookies
Headlines that don’t convey accurate information are invalid
Headlines can be accurate and incomplete. Headlines can be accurate and unintentionally ambiguous. A headline that conveys the totality of a situation or subject is a tweet.
Yes having read accurate and incomplete headlines — which incidentally is the best information ever gets — is a good basis for commenting on a story.
If the headlines aren’t accurate, that’s a problem.
Most of the time the article is the same length as the headline.
What even is journalism these days?
Or has a ton of filler because no one can get to the point. Gotta have a lot of lines so we can stuff more ads in the article
Or are paywalled, and/or require you to dismiss 57 pop-ups, reject cookies, stop and scroll past an irrelevant auto-playing video, and search for the actual content in half in wide strips between multiple 7" tall ads, some of which are excerpts from unrelated “articles” on the same site.
Don’t forget all the extra words they add to game search engines!
“Best I can do is come to the comments and get my info from there”
More like hecklines because they give such heckin complete and objective information
Wow… this is something that users on The Site That Shall Not Be Named were especially hostile about. Even if you made an irrelevant spelling mistake, it was like people couldn’t wait to be first to tell you to “read the fucking article.”
Actually, a lot of them didn’t even care about being first. Have eight people already commented “read the article”? So what? Might as well say the exact same thing a ninth time!
I can’t read. I use voice to text to post random repugnant opinions to the fediverse.
Aside from clickbait headlines subconsciously making opening links even more sus than it already is, they all just want you to go to the actual article so they can track at the very least their pagevisits for personal validation, leaving you either with misunderstandable headlines or “…and this is what happened next…”-cliffhangers.
Anyway, crossposting an article on many mediums - instead of making it on one external site and posting the link to other mediums - usually solves the problem. I’ll be more likely to read the entirety of anything òn the website I’m at than I am to follow external links to the unknown website people “thought was safe enough”. 😅
What is this BS? Are you saying I can’t just formulate a hasty opinion based solely off of 5 seconds of scanning a click-baity title and completely ignore any sort of subtle nuance or delve deeper for more information? I am OUTRAGED.
Why read the article when the journalist just uses the headline for their ChatGPT prompt?
