I think the print magazine is still pretty decent, but they do do quite a bit of clickbait for the website. Seems to be an attitude of "if you can't beat them,

I think the print magazine is still pretty decent, but they do do quite a bit of clickbait for the website. Seems to be an attitude of "if you can't beat them, join them". Gotta get the revenue stream to pay for the long-form journalism from somewhere, and hey, why not get some of it from vaguely liberal clickbait that'll do numbers on Twitter, instead of leaving that market completely to the bloggers. One thing I find particularly strange is when the two things collide. If you look at past submissions, you can see the HN headline often doesn't match the current headline at theatlantic.com, and the URL slug is often a remnant of a third headline. They rotate headlines even on the serious long-form pieces multiple times, presumably A/B testing what gets more clicks. So you end up with a good article that may have taken months to research and write, but saddled at the top with a series of clickbaity headlines that change every 2 hours. And the online headline often doesn't match the print headline for the same article (which obviously does not change).