3 ms·
It is substantially better to respond to article content, not headlines. Authors don’t write their headlines. It would be better if they did, but they don’t. S
by graeme 7y ago
It is substantially better to respond to article content, not headlines. Authors don’t write their headlines.
It would be better if they did, but they don’t. So if you argue against the headline only, you argue against a strawman.
(It’s fine to address the headline as well, as that gets a lot of attention. But don’t attribute it to the author)
- aazaa 7y agoThe headline is what brought many participants to this discussion. It's a part of the article, and comment-worthy. This looks like an editorial, for which it seems that at least some authors choose their own titles. For example, see: > Use a catchy title that ties into the theme of your piece. The title is what the reader sees first. Your title should entice the reader. https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/writing-op-eds https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/writing-op-eds There are other sources that give similar advice.
- graeme 7y agoI specifically said the title is worth commenting on. Just not the only thing or the main argument.