3 ms·

Note that the actual title is NASA Shares James Webb History Report, not the title as of this posting NASA Declines to Rename JWST. If the poster feels that the

Note that the actual title is NASA Shares James Webb History Report, not the title as of this posting NASA Declines to Rename JWST. If the poster feels that the title is clickbaity, I think that it could be simply clarified to Results of NASA Investigation on the James Webb Period, but I think that the original title is neutral enough. Edit 2022-11-18 20:06: I think that the full title of the report, NASA Historical Investigation into James E. Webb’s Relationship to the Lavender Scare is actually okay but too long for HN. NASA Investigation into Webb’s Relationship to the Lavender Scare is concise enough.

kloch 4y ago
I rarely editorialize titles. In this case I felt that NASA was intentionally "burying the lede" so I substituted with a clear headline so HN readers would know what it's actually about.
- dang 4y ago
  Burying the lede counts as misleading, especially in corporate press releases, which are usually designed to obfuscate*. So this is a legit edit, covered by the "unless" in "Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait." I hesitate to point this out for fear of opening a loophole for abuses, but it really is a consistent pattern with press releases. The other option, of course, is to find a good third-party article reporting on the same news. Whatever is in an organization's interest to obfuscate, is in a good reporter's interest to uncover, and if the story is important or popular, such an article probably exists somewhere. * https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=corporate%20press%20release%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...
  - zinekeller 4y ago
    Thanks dang for the insight > The other option, of course, is to find a good third-party article reporting on the same news. Whatever it's in an organization's interest to obfuscate, it's in a good reporter's interest to uncover, and if the story is important or popular, such an article probably exists somewhere. The problem I think that there's (as of posting) no third-party articles about this from reasonably-credible writers.
- thrill 4y ago
  So, you editorialize when it's to your liking?

kloch 4y ago

I rarely editorialize titles. In this case I felt that NASA was intentionally "burying the lede" so I substituted with a clear headline so HN readers would know what it's actually about.

dang 4y ago
Burying the lede counts as misleading, especially in corporate press releases, which are usually designed to obfuscate*. So this is a legit edit, covered by the "unless" in "Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait." I hesitate to point this out for fear of opening a loophole for abuses, but it really is a consistent pattern with press releases. The other option, of course, is to find a good third-party article reporting on the same news. Whatever is in an organization's interest to obfuscate, is in a good reporter's interest to uncover, and if the story is important or popular, such an article probably exists somewhere. * https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=corporate%20press%20release%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...
- zinekeller 4y ago
  Thanks dang for the insight > The other option, of course, is to find a good third-party article reporting on the same news. Whatever it's in an organization's interest to obfuscate, it's in a good reporter's interest to uncover, and if the story is important or popular, such an article probably exists somewhere. The problem I think that there's (as of posting) no third-party articles about this from reasonably-credible writers.
thrill 4y ago
So, you editorialize when it's to your liking?