necessarily wrong when a writer has information that is very interesting for his or her readers.
However, writers must not overplay the information given in the headline or readers will realize
that what the story offers does not match what the headline promised (Frampton, BBC News).
A headline should entice, and a story should deliver. This means that a story needs to
back up its headline. Yet, to be clear, if a headline is “teasing,” meaning it purposefully holds
back information or asks a question as a means to make readers click on the story, it does not
mean that headline is absolutely unethical. However, that headline becomes unethical if the
reader feels cheated after reading the story, if the question was not answered, or if holding back
information was only used to dramatized the story (Buttry, ONAethics).
A lot of clickbait headlines and social media posts tend to be “fluff” content. “Fluff”
includes content such as horoscopes, cute animal videos, crossword puzzles, pop-culture quizzes,
and more. Although, “fluff” content is not necessarily unethical so long as the content’s headline
does not mislead readers (Buttry, ONAethics).
Yet, this change in journalism has brought readers frustration (Frampton, BBC News).
Not only are readers clicking on stories with headlines that promise more than the story can
deliver, there also seems to be a lot more “fluff” content and a lot less “watchdog journalism”
content online (Buttry, ONAethics). Nevertheless, this trivial content is popular. It’s rarely
newsworthy, but it does attract readers. The assumption seems to be that audiences may stay for
the “serious” content after devouring the “fluff” (Dvorkin, PBS News Hour).
So why is this happening? The reason clickbait content has been saturating the digital
journalism world is simply because of economics (Frampton, BBC News). News companies
have always monitored their audience in one way or another, using tools like Nielsen and
Arbitron ratings, but now these companies need a way to monetize online stories (Buttry,