7 Comments
User's avatar
ImaginaryLizzie's avatar

Well done for getting this changed. Your husband is right! The new headline reflects the piece much more accurately. I still don’t see what they intended to achieve with the original, other than alienating potentially interested readers and winding people up πŸ€·πŸ»β€β™€οΈ

Expand full comment
Allegra Chapman (she/her)'s avatar

Thanks. I'm grateful they were decent about it. Algorithm's thrive on anger and hate, sadly, and we're all slaves to them. Sigh.

Expand full comment
Beth the Baker's avatar

Titles carry a lot of weight and some people are just looking for indignation. Good for you for getting it changed.

It bothers me to no end when people comment on articles without actually reading them. So many times people aren’t looking for thoughtful content. Makes me sad. They’re probably the ones whose benefit most.

Expand full comment
Tamsin πŸ‚ 🐸 πŸͺž's avatar

I’m so glad you got it changed.

Expand full comment
Ryn Kingsley's avatar

Oh wow! As a poet, I know titles do so much work. I didn't realize writer's often don't get any say on these headlines. I'm glad you were able to get it changed to something that didn't so misrepresent you!

Expand full comment
Louise Tilbrook's avatar

Oh wow, I genuinely didn't realise this before about headlines. What a fascinating article and it was so interesting to read about the background to this. Thank you - it certainly will help me to maybe dial down my immediate emotional response to the more click-baitey headlines.

Expand full comment
Allegra Chapman (she/her)'s avatar

Yeah I don't think most people realise. And why would you? It's perfectly sensible to assume that the person who wrote the article also wrote the massive words at the top. It's one of those weird quirks of the media world that everyone just accepts, while writers duck for cover under the comments section shouting "but if you'd just read the rest of the piece..."

Expand full comment