Dep! wrote: » What's the worst Click Bait headline you've seen and what are your thoughts on this internet plague?
Hande hoche! wrote: » Buzzfeed and gawker ****e. Also dermatologists hate her.
Banjo String wrote: » This will blow your mind!
UCDVet wrote: » No disrespect to you personally, but, I'm sorry, to me....this is stupid. Headlines are written with the INTENT of catching people's attention. If a particular style proves effective, it's because THAT IS WHAT PEOPLE WANT. Clearly, it's not what *you* want. I'm sure you aren't alone, and you're welcome to write headlines that cater to your sensibilities or to seek out places that write headlines how you like to see them. But, it seems like you're probably in the minority. As demonstrated by the effectiveness. If you have to *blame* someone for the situation, blame the people who like headlines different from yourself. Not the writers who are successfully providing entertainment in the way that other people enjoy. Still, in my opinion, it seems pretty silly to hold a grudge against people for liking stuff you don't.
UCDVet wrote: » No disrespect to you personally, but, I'm sorry, to me....this is stupid. Headlines are written with the INTENT of catching people's attention. If a particular style proves effective, it's because THAT IS WHAT PEOPLE WANT.
Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: » The whole clickbait thing would appear to my untrained eye to be a pyramid scheme of sorts. Sites like the journal.ie take news from media sources like Reuters, the Independent and the Times and republish it with a few changes. Place a few related articles links underneath it, and open the floor to the baying masses to post their ill-informed opinions about what tend to be complex economic, political and societal stories. The media outlets struggling to still remain relevant with their traditional model of charging for news are being eaten alive by parasites who won't have these outlets to steal from when the whole model becomes untenable. You'll then end up with sites filled with sponsored articles, cheap rehashing of press releases, and news that is sold to the highest bidder. So excuse me if I still think that paying less than €3 for access to the digital edition of the Times and the Indo is worth paying a price for.
tomwaterford wrote: » In fairness paying to access the indo :pac: :pac:
Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: » The Indo has the largest circulation of any of the daily papers. The Sindo is the paper with the most copies sold on a Sunday. The titles represent an enormous rump of Irish society that still aspire to count themselves as middle class. As unfashionable and tragic as that may seem to the new cohort of online activists who believe that a policy of taking other peoples money and bleating on about a conflict we are all bored about represents the modern face of Ireland. So I'll continue to pay for it. My ability to pay for it and read it subjectively is far more worthy than you not paying for it; but being hugely outraged about the articles you invariably end up reading to the end.
Dep! wrote: » what are your thoughts on this internet plague?
jester77 wrote: » Don't click on them. If people didn't click on them them they wouldn't exist.
Your Superior wrote: » Number 7 Will Shock You!
