4 ms·
> This is why I like hackernews. HN guidelines mandate "the worst possible way to do reporting" by not allowing submitters to alter headlines that are obviousl
by erichocean 6y ago
> This is why I like hackernews.
HN guidelines mandate "the worst possible way to do reporting" by not allowing submitters to alter headlines that are obviously bad.
Most HN readers wouldn't even click on the article, or even click on the comments page. But they see the headline.
- tutfbhuf 6y agoWe have the collective free will to ignore posts with such headlines.
- dredmorbius 6y agoCollective free will demonstrably scales poorly in media.
- ScottFree 6y agocitation needed.
- dredmorbius 6y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22176686 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22176686 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17689715 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17689715
- ScottFree 6y agoCome again?
- dgrin91 6y agoThe correct solution here is not to change the headline, but to not post crap like this on HN
- dredmorbius 6y agoThe guidelines specifically encourage substituting for clickbait or thoughtstopping headlines: If the title begins with a number or number + gratuitous adjective, we'd appreciate it if you'd crop it. E.g. translate "10 Ways To Do X" to "How To Do X," and "14 Amazing Ys" to "Ys." Exception: when the number is meaningful, e.g. "The 5 Platonic Solids." Otherwise please 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 Often a subhead or lede is a vast improvement. Here I'd argue for "The pandemic forced schools into a crash course in online education." (Submitting to hn@ycombinator.com)
- erichocean 6y agoAre you honestly suggesting that applies to WSJ headlines in general, and this specific instance in particular? I suspect not. In which case, what—exactly—are you trying to accomplish with your comment? Muddy the waters? Convince people there's no problem? Waste people's time on irrelevant info?
- dredmorbius 6y agoThe guidelines are absolutely general, not merely the WSJ. I'll let you work out the applicability of my suggested alternate, possibly comparing it with dang's editorial choice. I'm not sure what your specific beef is. The article, regardless of merits, would be better discussed with ... (checks and sees a changed title on HN) ... something other than the originally-submitted, WSJ-provided, headline. I'm distinctly not a fan of the WSJ. The argument that the recent, global, crash-course on distance learning has ... proved uneven ... should hardly be controversial. It deserves a fair hearing, whether the WSJ has done so or not, and the topic seems well within HN's remit.
- Wowfunhappy 6y agoThe guidelines say "please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait" I sadly can't read this article because I'm not sure how to get around the paywall, but if it actually reaches the level of linkbait it can be changed.
- dredmorbius 6y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23450676 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23450676