←back to thread

138 points pmags | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.907s | source
Show context
fc417fc802 ◴[] No.43645595[source]
Can't say I'm a fan of a prestigious scientific outlet adopting clickbait style headlines. This is the second one from the same place on the front page right now.
replies(1): >>43645960 #
1. epgui ◴[] No.43645960[source]
I did my MSc (biochem) on freeMitos and mitoMPs in a cancer immunology context, and I'm not really seeing the clickbaitiness here. The text seems totally reasonable.

You need to realize you're reading editorial content, and not a review or research paper.

replies(1): >>43646382 #
2. fc417fc802 ◴[] No.43646382[source]
The clickbait is the "What does it mean?" format.

"Researchers are trying to work out why."

"Here's what 4k researchers think."

It's possible that clickbait is technically the wrong term but it's a pattern that I strongly associate with those practices. It's an idiocracy-esque development. Learning that it has spread to the likes of Nature is saddening.

replies(1): >>43646517 #
3. pmags ◴[] No.43646517[source]
I posted the article here, and I had a fairly similar reaction to yours.

I was tempted to remove the "What does this mean for our health?" part of the title, but I thought that such a large edit might be against HN policy / too much editorializing on my part.

In any case, I thought the article was worth posting because it's a nice intro to a area of recent progress in biology that not a lot of folks are aware of.