If it was clear, after reading the headline I would not have assumed that QUIC was proposed to replace the internet protocol (IP) for the internet. The title "

If it was clear, after reading the headline I would not have assumed that QUIC was proposed to replace the internet protocol (IP) for the internet. The title "QUIC -- Will it replace TCP?" would be accurate and correct and contains everything both necessary and sufficient to describe the article. Adding in unrelated extras, like QUIC replacing IP, conveys additional and incorrect information. It muddies what the article is about. Calling out unclear and misleading communications is not being pedantic. Clarity is the most fundamental aspect of good and effective communications. The headline writer does not need an apologist, they need to expand their knowledge of the subject they are writing about.