[falcolas]

Oh, I completely understand why they did it. And why they have the thumbnails of a person looking shocked at whatever the subject matter is.

But I hate it. The change is a tangible downgrade that cheapens the channels who do it. I'm glad for them that they have a larger reach, but I'm no longer a part of that reach because I can't stomach the chintzy thumbnails and titles designed to appeal to first-graders. I voted with my feet on that change.

Maybe that's just me.

[blondin]

same here. i straight up ignore these videos, no matter who posted it.

if you have to have an arrow pointed to something in your thumbnail. or have to make a shocking face, you do not value me or my time.

there are many other videos to watch. i have ignored many that follow this rather dumb trend. and i still can get to the bottom of my watch later, guys.

[bradlys]

I find this as childish as to not read a book because it doesn’t have a flashy cover.

[ad404b8a372f2b9]

It's more like not reading a book because it has a flashy cover. Sex sells but I won't buy a book about physics that has a woman in a bikini on the cover. It's about the signals you send as an author.

[pjc50]

This is bad news for the Britney Spears Guide to Semiconductor Physics (yes, google it)

[bradlys]

It’s just as childish because you’re making assumptions about the content based off a cover.

It’s no different.

Something something MLK quote something something.

[jerf]

"Don't judge a book by its cover" is a lie-to-children; there's some truth to it, but if I were making a list of sayings we tell to children and how truthful it is, this one would actually be rather far down my list. Judging things by their cover is generally effective. The horde of exceptions stampeding into your mind and encouraging you to hit "Reply" and start to list them are exactly that: Exceptions.

There are, admittedly, rather a lot of them. I look over at my bookshelf and I could show you some myself. Nevertheless, it really is a better heuristic than a lot of people would care to admit.

Part of this is because covers have a lot of intentionality in them. People deliberately imbue them with information. I don't ignore them. Mind you, I might not come to the intended conclusions... to take one clear example, the intentional message being sent by romance book covers and the one I receive are fairly different. Nevertheless, in the end, both I and the publisher are generally satisfied by the transaction, even if they might prefer I buy it anyhow, I'm not in the target audience and they know that.

[falcolas]

They made no assumptions about the content. They simply expressed a distaste for the cover.

To continue the analogy, there are plenty of physics textbook manufacturers, and not all of them decide to use sex to sell their textbooks. Choosing to not engage with a blatant marketing tactic and picking another textbook is a perfectly valid action for someone of any age.

[falcolas]

As you pointed out above, presentation matters. Quite a bit. The tricky bit is that "matters" works in both directions. And the only method I have - that any of us has - when it comes to discouraging clickbait... is not to click.

Choosing to use what agency I have available to me is hardly childish.