I highly disagree. The original title has nothing to do with the contentious "meat" of the article other than being factually correct and "neutral"-enough to be

I highly disagree. The original title has nothing to do with the contentious "meat" of the article other than being factually correct and "neutral"-enough to be ignored. It may as well be a Reuters article in terms of the headline. It's like having an article about a facial recognition surveillance law being enacted by government and the title being: "Privacy Experts Criticize Government Legislation on Surveillance"