• Linktank@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s clickbait because it doesn’t say the important part in the headline. Forcing you to click the article to know what the fuck they’re talking about. It’s a dick way to operate even if it doesn’t fall under the exact definition.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yes that can be the case, but in this situation there are multiple reasons, and mentioning some would make the content of the article seem as less than it really has, and mentioning all would make an excessively long headline.

        You also have to be realistic, and not call something clickbait that really isn’t.
        I agree that 9 times out of 10,such a headline could be clickbait. but in this case there is actually a good reason for the headline.

    • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 days ago

      Does clickbait have to be misleading? I have always considered anything phrased so as to compel you to read further by omitting the crux of the article to be clickbait, so this would absolutely fall under that. An article with a headline like “never do this while tanning!” that’s about the dangers of citric acid on your skin in the sunlight is a useful, true article with a clickbait title, as another example.