There is a rule against submitters editing titles to be more sensationalist, but in this case, the submitter copied the submission's title verbatim.

I don't think that is true. There have been cases in the recent past where the mods changed titles because they were overly sensational, even if they were the original title.

Well, the guidelines say:

> [Please] use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.

This sounds like the submitter MAY tone it down, with "MAY" like in RFC 2119.

Your comment is too short, information-free and only implicitly makes a point; it doesn't argue why this title would be sensationalized by the EFF.

The article proposes that while "recently, developers of major browsers have started building tracking protections into their own products (...) Google Chrome, the largest browser in the world, has no built-in tracker blocker, nor has the company indicated any plans to build one.

"Alphabet has a vested interest in helping track people and serve them ads, even when that puts the company at odds with its users. And that may explain why Chrome lacks real tracking protections."

These two main points, regardless of whether you agree with them, are reflected in the title.