• expatriado@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    38
    ·
    4 months ago

    i don’t like this kind of interaction, i see it all the time. We read the articles and watch the videos to gather more information, to get the details, but article/video titles shouldn’t be misleading, it totally hints that that’s what all was about, and there is plenty of characters left to mention otherwise

    • a lil bee 🐝@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s nobody’s fault but your own that you did not actually watch a video or read an article. Don’t watch/read, don’t comment. Easy. The title isn’t deceptive just because it isn’t a perfect TL;DR for lazy internet forum users.

    • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I don’t like it either, but blame the article and editors, not the OP/commentors.

        • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yeah you are right, and the full video reference is a couple clicks in. Another lemmy commentor linked the youtube video directly which helps relieve the confusion which you identified.

        • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          OP seems to have pulled through, now mentions a few seconds on legal woes rather than implying the whole thing was about it.

          • ccunning@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            Cool - Thanks OP!

            I’m mostly just annoyed that the top comment got away with slagging the video as being an attack video when it wasn’t.

            I don’t blame OP at all; it was just a trash headline from ABC.

            /cc @[email protected]