3 ms·

No. Source: Betteridge's law of headlines

• Waterluvian 11mo ago
  Bettridge’s Law of Bettridge’s Law: there will always be someone in the comments section mentioning Bettridge’s Law.
  • Esophagus4 11mo ago
    We’re really just tired of news slowly morphing into Buzzfeed style clickbait, and this is our only outlet to complain about it. Other annoying headlines: “This is why interest rates are so high” “What I learned about X from one month doing Y”
    • tavavex 11mo ago
      I'm not seeing how this article is clickbait of any kind. Betteridge's Law really only works for articles that manufacture a provocative question out of nowhere to attract readership, and then have to sheepishly back down in the article body because obviously it's not true. But this article is formulated as a question because it has genuine speculation about the future that nobody is quite sure about. It has points for both sides of the argument. There's no Yes/No answer here. How else would you format the title of such an article?
      • Esophagus4 11mo ago
        Did you read the article? The author admits that the answer to his own question is no. Which, again, affirms Betteridge’s Law. > A more plausible explanation for the present weak patch, and for companies’ reluctance to hire, is Trumpian uncertainty. That is now beginning to ease. The chaos of Mr Trump’s tariff roll-out seems to be receding. Deportations and changes to visa rules will remain disruptive, but businesses are starting to adapt. Although 2026 is unlikely to be a year of calm and clarity for America, it may well be a bit less frenzied. That would boost the labour market. American workers’ decade-long hot streak may have longer to run. To paraphrase his conclusion: no. Things are soft, but in general, probably fine for 2026. This is what I am saying - I’m sick of seeing sensational, clickbait, disaster-porn headlines, especially when the author timidly backs off and plays both sides once they have your attention. It’s such a lack of journalistic integrity.