It's not even clickbait. It's not sensationalist in any way really. It actually captures in a one sentence summary exactly what the article is about.
I honestly think that there should be a reporting mechanism for folks to complain about submarine articles, or click-bait headlines. So often I find that they aren't the case and it adds zero to any actual discourse around the subject matter itself.
I think if you have an issue with clickbait headlines you really should email the site admins/moderators. They are pretty good about getting back to you, mostly.
"Click-bait" is another one of those terms that gets thrown around too far regularly these days. MOST headlines are "click-bait" both online and in print. Headlines are supposed to grab your interest whether because of the topic itself, through clever wordplay (as the Economist tends to do), or through perhaps less scrupulous means. If a headline is deceptive or otherwise is misleading people (subject to the limitations of a short headline), say so explicitly--don't default to click-bait.
Agreed. Even better than just saying so, it would be far more edifying for all if the person making the claim would justify it with reasoning as to why the headline is misleading!
Just using the words "click-bait" is even worse than a click-bait headline. In fact, it just becomes forum-spam.
