Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I think this is a definition thing, because I agree with you, but the author's comment below seems to imply clickbait is anything that looks flashy. I found this definition when googling "what is clickbait" and I like it:

> Clickbait is a sensationalized headline that encourages you to click a link to an article, image, or video. Instead of presenting objective facts, clickbait headlines often appeal to your emotions and curiosity. Once you click, the website hosting the link earns revenue from advertisers, but the actual content is usually of questionable quality and accuracy. Websites use clickbait to draw in as many clicks as possible, thus increasing their ad revenue.[0]

In Tom Scott's case, the video thumbnails look flashy but are accurate and representative of the video.

I think a good example of clickbait vs non-clickbait according to this definition would be Jazza vs NerdForge. I stopped watching Jazza because he would put great looking art in the thumbnail slightly blurred out, and the actual video would be about everything except that artwork. Whereas Nerdforge will show a huge piece of beautiful art, and that's what the whole video is about.

Just because someone presents their work well doesn't mean it's clickbait. And this is an age old problem, it's the reason we have the idiom "don't judge a book by its cover". I appreciate the effort people like Tom Scott, Sebastian Lague, and Nerdforge put into their thumbnails, because a picture is worth 1000 words and they use their thumbnails to paint that picture.

[0]: https://edu.gcfglobal.org/en/thenow/what-is-clickbait/1/#



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: