6 ms·

Title seems to be "Mark Zuckerberg Thinks We’re Idiots"..?

by nkkollaw 9y ago

dredmorbius 9y ago
HN routinely de-fang headlines, particularly on hot-button topics, in the interest of more informed discussion.
- newscracker 9y ago
  I don't think this is a good idea — changing the title completely from what the author of the content put up, without retaining even a part of it. The current title for this article is horrendously long and quite frankly, boring. While we're on the topic of Facebook, misinformation, etc., this title change could also be classified as misinformation by HN, though the claimed purpose is for good instead of for evil. Why? Because most people decide to read articles based on the titles, and many people also derive conclusions on what the article is about from the title. It doesn't matter much if some sentence was lifted off the article and used. This should be as the author of the post intended. But HN is a private site, and can do whatever it wants on content shared here. I'll just voice my strong disagreement on this title change, especially on the topic of Facebook and recent revelations. I don't need more justifications.
- nkkollaw 9y ago
  I thought the rule was to not editorialize titles..?
  - grzm 9y ago
    With a few exceptions. In particular: > "[P]lease use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait. Don't editorialize." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - nkkollaw 9y ago
      But was it misleading or clickbait? I'm just curious.
      - grzm 9y ago
        Arguably, yes. It's written to elicit a strong emotional response that can affect the direction and quality of discussion. After all, one of the primary goals of HN is quality discussion. The mods have written about this when commenting on title changes: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:dang%20changed%20title&sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:dang%20changed%20title&... In particular, this one seems appropriate: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16336433 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16336433
  - dredmorbius 9y ago
    If my assumpton here is valid, it was HN specifically who did this. Some previous mentions of similar changes (or not, with regrets): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11500234#11511521 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11500234#11511521 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9793358#9794491 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9793358#9794491 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10640478#10642264 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10640478#10642264 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14190764#14196106 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14190764#14196106 And more: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=dang%20changed%20title%20discussion&sort=byPopularity&prefix=false&page=0&dateRange=pastYear&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?query=dang%20changed%20title%20discu...

Title seems to be "Mark Zuckerberg Thinks We’re Idiots"..?

dredmorbius 9y ago

HN routinely de-fang headlines, particularly on hot-button topics, in the interest of more informed discussion.

newscracker 9y ago
I don't think this is a good idea — changing the title completely from what the author of the content put up, without retaining even a part of it. The current title for this article is horrendously long and quite frankly, boring. While we're on the topic of Facebook, misinformation, etc., this title change could also be classified as misinformation by HN, though the claimed purpose is for good instead of for evil. Why? Because most people decide to read articles based on the titles, and many people also derive conclusions on what the article is about from the title. It doesn't matter much if some sentence was lifted off the article and used. This should be as the author of the post intended. But HN is a private site, and can do whatever it wants on content shared here. I'll just voice my strong disagreement on this title change, especially on the topic of Facebook and recent revelations. I don't need more justifications.
nkkollaw 9y ago
I thought the rule was to not editorialize titles..?
- grzm 9y ago
  With a few exceptions. In particular: > "[P]lease use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait. Don't editorialize." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - nkkollaw 9y ago
    But was it misleading or clickbait? I'm just curious.
    - grzm 9y ago
      Arguably, yes. It's written to elicit a strong emotional response that can affect the direction and quality of discussion. After all, one of the primary goals of HN is quality discussion. The mods have written about this when commenting on title changes: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:dang%20changed%20title&sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:dang%20changed%20title&... In particular, this one seems appropriate: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16336433 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16336433
- dredmorbius 9y ago
  If my assumpton here is valid, it was HN specifically who did this. Some previous mentions of similar changes (or not, with regrets): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11500234#11511521 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11500234#11511521 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9793358#9794491 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9793358#9794491 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10640478#10642264 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10640478#10642264 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14190764#14196106 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14190764#14196106 And more: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=dang%20changed%20title%20discussion&sort=byPopularity&prefix=false&page=0&dateRange=pastYear&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?query=dang%20changed%20title%20discu...