> These are bad examples because you are explicitly paying for these items as opposed to clickbait / attention grabbing content which gets more viewership the m

> These are bad examples because you are explicitly paying for these items as opposed to clickbait / attention grabbing content which gets more viewership the more controversial it is (which has been proven by various studies). This seems the same to me. A book with a flashy cover or title is more likely to be purchased because it's attention grabbing. Action movies have trailers with explosions and one-liner quips because they're attention grabbing. Cereal boxes say "new and improved!" because it's attention grabbing. Magazines and cable news ask "Does Jell-o cause cancer?" because it's attention grabbing. Controversial content gets more clicks because it's attention grabbing, so I would absolutely expect that to be more enticing than the same information packaged less flamboyantly (just like I'd expect more attention-grabbing books, movies, cereal, and magazines to perform better as well.)