| I don't know the intended goal. It might just be clicks or page views, but what typically happens is: - Article launches with sensational, buzzfeed quality linkbait headline. - Article gets lots of clicks - The title is quietly changed to a more restrained version which often matches the print edition title. At first I thought there must just be different editors overseeing the web and print editions, but now I think it's an intentional form of viral marketing or activist editing. In some cases, the sensational headlines really diminish the journalistic quality/seriousness of the article, or create the impression that a minor point in the article was the main thrust of the article. Similarly, there has occasionally been a headline that appears intentionally boring so that the paper can publish a story but effectively hide it from view. So in a nutshell it's classic misdirection, enabled by the digital medium, since tracks can be fairly easily covered making it harder for those who care/notice to call attention to it. For a while I thought about creating a screenshot archive of changed titles but eventually just stopped reading the paper. |