[bogomipz]

Oh the tired old accusation of "that's just a ______ fallacy", the rest of my comment is simply pointing to that fact that the publication is not one whose business model is clickbait a la Buzzfeed. There is no claim of "authority" in that.

[cholantesh]

A venerable institution can fall on hard times and make decisions that reflect poorly on it, but generate revenue. And even in the best of times, a dud can slip through the editorial cracks.

[bogomipz]

How did you come to the conclusion that the Atlantic has fallen on hard times?

An article being a "dud" is highly subjective, even if you yourself haven't found an article to be a worthwhile read does not qualify qualify an article as "clickbait".

There is nothing sensational in the article, it is simply discussing findings in a study.

The Atlantic has actually fared pretty well:

[1] "The Atlantic saw the highest increase in circulation, expanding slightly by 2% in 2015."

http://www.journalism.org/2016/06/15/news-magazines-fact-she...

This 2016 is the most recent data available.

[cholantesh]

>How did you come to the conclusion that the Atlantic has fallen on hard times?

I haven't. I'm simply pointing out that their venerability doesn't guarantee that everything they put out is of the highest caliber. The bevy of think (or whine) pieces it has published about millennials and safe spaces speaks to that, I feel.

>There is nothing sensational in the article, it is simply discussing findings in a study.

Which is sufficient as a rebuttal to the claim that it is clickbait.