4 ms·

You’re missing the bait part of clickbait. Baiting a fish is tricking them into thinking they’ll get a meal, when they won’t. Clickbait is for things like “You

You’re missing the bait part of clickbait. Baiting a fish is tricking them into thinking they’ll get a meal, when they won’t. Clickbait is for things like “You won’t believe the shocking thing Harrison Ford did this morning!!” —and it turns out he buttered his toast. All too common, when media companies actually do not have a story, or the funds to go deep on a story, so instead mislead the reader into thinking a story is there when it isn’t. In other words, bait. This article delivers what it promises, which is unveiling the mystery and the context around it in a well written and researched fashion. I would be very sad if all headlines had to be so reductionistically explicit that there was no room for narrative. For example in this case the presence of the box was hanging over the family for years. Leaving that mystery to the reader does make a tantalizing headline, but also allows for increased identification with the family itself. That will not be true for all readers, but let’s please separate clickbait from anticipation and suspense.

ramphastidae 7y ago
> You’re missing the bait part of clickbait. It's not missing at all. The bait is the phrase "her secret in the freezer". The article may be high quality but the title is clickbait, plain and simple. Do you believe the author chose that title themselves? Or was it the editors who have marketing-set quotas to reach? Why do you think the top voted comment in this thread is the explanation of what "her secret in the freezer" is? Why do you think the top replying comment to that is the primary HN mod acknowledging it is clickbait?
- lemmsjid 7y ago
  This is probably a pointless argument, because I will heartily agree this is all about semantics that are not locked into the language :). But I believe a quite acceptable distinction between 'clickbait' and a 'lead-in' or what-have-you is that the article A) does tell you what the secret is that was promised by the headline, and B) the secret is to the point of the article and not overly sensationalized by the title. I'll borrow Wikipedia's definition: "Clickbait is a form of false advertisement which uses hyperlink text or a thumbnail link that is designed to attract attention and entice users to follow that link and read, view, or listen to the linked piece of online content, with a defining characteristic of being deceptive, typically sensationalized or misleading." What I'm focusing on is what wikipedia calls the 'defining characteristic', which is what separates it from headlines intended to build suspense. In other words, a title is not clickbait if it tries to entice you with tantalizingly withheld information, it is clickbait if it lures you into an article that does not provide the information thusly withheld, or it turns out the information was inaccurately implied by the title. In the same way, a piece of food that entices a fish is only bait if it will not provide a meal but instead put the fish in a situation they did not intend on being in (getting caught). If you extend clickbait to situations like this article, there isn't really a word left for the ones that are actively misleading. For example there's a newspaper that keeps getting me to click on its stuff in Google News because it tells me an asteroid almost blew up Earth, when in fact the asteroid had an infintesimal chance of doing so. That is clickbait. Having worked in content recommendations quite a bit, I can say it's quite a painful situation. What would make the above article title clickbait would have been if it turned out he found spoiled milk in the freezer, or some other pedestrian product. Which happens quite a bit in Internet syndicated media.
  - ramphastidae 7y ago
    OK, if I'm understanding you correctly, you define clickbait as articles that don't deliver the legitimate content promised in the headline, regardless of whether the headline is sensationalized or not. Does that mean that the fisherman who puts bait on a hook, catches a fish, but then provides the fish with a full meal and lets it free is not baiting the fish? Anyway, I appreciate your explanation, and it definitely made me think. I would have to agree that feature articles like this one making their titles more enticing is not clickbait, it's just good creative writing. But if this was a news article I would remain as stubborn in my original opinion!
    - lemmsjid 7y ago
      Good question on the fish, I suppose that quite stretches the metaphor :). I suppose if I were the fish I’d still be traumatized after being yanked out of the water and provided a solid meal. On feature vs news titles I’m totally with you and your point is very much taken. Yes it is a problem from that perspective when only the title is syndicated without the context of what type of article it is. For example the Washington Post runs a column that is a satirical take on the news, written with a straight face. Google News syndicates it as news with no differentiation, and I kept having surreal “wuh??” moments until I started recognizing the author. I guess we need more metadata besides title and source. Thanks for a good discussion.

ramphastidae 7y ago

> You’re missing the bait part of clickbait. It's not missing at all. The bait is the phrase "her secret in the freezer". The article may be high quality but the title is clickbait, plain and simple. Do you believe the author chose that title themselves? Or was it the editors who have marketing-set quotas to reach? Why do you think the top voted comment in this thread is the explanation of what "her secret in the freezer" is? Why do you think the top replying comment to that is the primary HN mod acknowledging it is clickbait?

lemmsjid 7y ago
This is probably a pointless argument, because I will heartily agree this is all about semantics that are not locked into the language :). But I believe a quite acceptable distinction between 'clickbait' and a 'lead-in' or what-have-you is that the article A) does tell you what the secret is that was promised by the headline, and B) the secret is to the point of the article and not overly sensationalized by the title. I'll borrow Wikipedia's definition: "Clickbait is a form of false advertisement which uses hyperlink text or a thumbnail link that is designed to attract attention and entice users to follow that link and read, view, or listen to the linked piece of online content, with a defining characteristic of being deceptive, typically sensationalized or misleading." What I'm focusing on is what wikipedia calls the 'defining characteristic', which is what separates it from headlines intended to build suspense. In other words, a title is not clickbait if it tries to entice you with tantalizingly withheld information, it is clickbait if it lures you into an article that does not provide the information thusly withheld, or it turns out the information was inaccurately implied by the title. In the same way, a piece of food that entices a fish is only bait if it will not provide a meal but instead put the fish in a situation they did not intend on being in (getting caught). If you extend clickbait to situations like this article, there isn't really a word left for the ones that are actively misleading. For example there's a newspaper that keeps getting me to click on its stuff in Google News because it tells me an asteroid almost blew up Earth, when in fact the asteroid had an infintesimal chance of doing so. That is clickbait. Having worked in content recommendations quite a bit, I can say it's quite a painful situation. What would make the above article title clickbait would have been if it turned out he found spoiled milk in the freezer, or some other pedestrian product. Which happens quite a bit in Internet syndicated media.
- ramphastidae 7y ago
  OK, if I'm understanding you correctly, you define clickbait as articles that don't deliver the legitimate content promised in the headline, regardless of whether the headline is sensationalized or not. Does that mean that the fisherman who puts bait on a hook, catches a fish, but then provides the fish with a full meal and lets it free is not baiting the fish? Anyway, I appreciate your explanation, and it definitely made me think. I would have to agree that feature articles like this one making their titles more enticing is not clickbait, it's just good creative writing. But if this was a news article I would remain as stubborn in my original opinion!
  - lemmsjid 7y ago
    Good question on the fish, I suppose that quite stretches the metaphor :). I suppose if I were the fish I’d still be traumatized after being yanked out of the water and provided a solid meal. On feature vs news titles I’m totally with you and your point is very much taken. Yes it is a problem from that perspective when only the title is syndicated without the context of what type of article it is. For example the Washington Post runs a column that is a satirical take on the news, written with a straight face. Google News syndicates it as news with no differentiation, and I kept having surreal “wuh??” moments until I started recognizing the author. I guess we need more metadata besides title and source. Thanks for a good discussion.