[loup-vaillant]

The editorialised title is both accurate to the beginning of the article, and more informative. I would have ignored the original title. Thanks to the editorialised title, I now know that magnets can mess with pacemakers.

[bergstromm466]

> The editorialised title is both accurate to the beginning of the article, and more informative. I would have ignored the original title.

I don't understand why dang and other mods justify their gatekeeping when they edit the title to use 'expensive words', like they did here. It makes me feel so frustrated. Stop with the academia-industrial-complex and let people link to articles/papers how they want to. Stop with the PR already (removing 'iPhone').

[thih9]

I think the idea is to trust the author’s judgment and do not change the focus (here: “phones containing magnets” vs “iPhone 12”) of the original article, especially in an attempt to make the title stand out more or get more views.

[colejohnson66]

Because “editorializing” the title introduces biases (either knowingly or unknowingly). Was “iPhone 12” added in the submitted title just to make it more specific, or was it a nudge to bring on the Apple haters?

[bergstromm466]

Who cares about Apple haters? I care that it’s a super common device that a lot of people have and could therefore be dangerous