Attention Grabbing Headlines are Hurting Journalism

I've been really frustrated recently with the state of online news content, specifically the lengths to which news outlets go to in order to get someone to read an article. The overuse of misleading adjectives like Insane, Amazing, Miserable, Craziest are one of their favorite tactics and one that frustrates me to no end. It's like a replay of the story of the boy who cried wolf every time I want to see what's going on in the world, and I think any serious journalist should recognize that by constantly creating misleading headlines they are doing their readers and the public at large a huge disservice . How should a consumer know when a specific article really is a must-read and when it is just an article. Case in point is this article I came across on Business Insider titled, "The insane ritual Tim Cook goes through every time he visits and Apple Store."

I am an Apple fan and appreciate the work Tim has done at Apple since taking over from Steve Jobs so I figured I would give it a read. My expectation was that maybe Mr. Cook is known to spent hours in a random store making sure everything is just so. That the level of perfection he expects from all Apple Stores at all times is as high as the quality of the products they're selling (which I'm sure it is). Maybe he is known to get on his hands and knees and scrub the floors until they meet his expectations. Anything that a normal CEO would find beneath them. To my dismay the article's main point was that with the exception of the store manager employees do not know when to expect a visit from Mr. Cook and that (drum roll please) he enters through the back door before talking to employee's. I don't believe that anyone in their right mind would find the content in this article approaching anywhere near the level of "Insane."

The question is why do media outlets and journalists feel the need to misrepresent their work to their readers. The easy answer is that there is so much content out there right now it is necessary to be successful, which I can appreciate to a point. In the long run, I think these types of tactics undermine great journalists and writers everywhere and insult the intelligence of readers.

7 responses

Well, it's quite simple actually. The unwillingness of the majority of consumers to pay for content in written form has created an industry that relies on clickbait strategies to further their income via display ads and affiliate marketing links. There is hardly any other way to compete in this space - as soon as one party starts applying the clickbait strategy, other players are left behind. Of course quality publications with a very specific audience can be an exception to the rule. But as I see it, this is something the market has brought onto itself via the consumers - they are the only ones in the position to revert the change.

— Tom

Or this tells you that the value of most content is actually zero (which is why people won't pay for it) and journalism is heavily overpopulated.

— Jackson Marten

At least they refrained from going with something unnecessarily salacious. I can handle overly sensational headlines if avoids something like "Cook Enters Through the Back Door."

— T

So it turns out that click bait headlines generate up to 1500% higher CTRs than the more modest headlines (http://bit.ly/1FGto1g). This probably needs more research to arrive at a more precise number but based on the extreme prevalence of them I'd be surprised if it's not at least that high.

— Ned Rockson

If you wanted more hits you should have titled this: Are Insane, Attention Grabbing Headlines Killing Journalism?

— Mitch

2 visitors upvoted this post.