3 ms·
As an aside I'd be interested in hearing why the article title was changed here - I thought it was explicit policy to almost always have the actual article titl
by misnome 10y ago
As an aside I'd be interested in hearing why the article title was changed here - I thought it was explicit policy to almost always have the actual article titles?
- dang 10y agoPlease see the HN guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html): Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait. This one was both, so the guidelines mandated changing it. We changed it to a phrase from the article that seemed to more accurately and neutral describe its point.
- misnome 10y agoInteresting; although it appears as linkbait on initially reading the title, I'd argue that the articles central thrust is accurately represented by its original title - therefore counting as neither (using a definition of linkbait as a title to drive clicks that is not representative of the article). The article isn't arguing just that photography is changing, but that Apple is stuck in "The past".
- dang 10y agoWe don't always pick the best replacement titles; "Apple doesn’t understand photography" is such outrageous clickbait that perhaps we overcompensated. I don't think "Apple is stuck in the past" would be much better, but if you want to suggest an accurate, neutral title, we'd be happy to change it again.