By programming languages, do you mean Rust?
In this way Lisp suffers from having no syntax, although it's a slightly different argument. When you can't have flamewars about a language's syntax, fewer articles are written about it. So instead, people will argue about the encoding of the AST - the parentheses.
Similarly, well-designed languages like Clojure, Haskell and Erlang have fewer questions on StackOverflow and older GitHub issues, so there are fewer flamewars about them (although monads are Haskell's saving grace here).
The NPM crowd are quick to ask, "Is this project abandoned?" when it hasn't had any activity for a year. In Clojure country, we dislike using libraries that haven't been stable for at least five years. As Alan Kay put it, Computer Science is very much a pop culture.
The phenomenon needs a good name, though. Perhaps the Moving Target Paradox, since developers are more likely to run after a moving target.
Jamie Zawinski calls this the CADT model: "Cascade of Attention-Deficit Teenagers".
Can you share the methodology you used to validate that this explanation is correct, ruling out the orders of magnitude larger and wider audiences which the languages with more questions have?
This is pretty brilliant. Did you just make this up or it a real thing?
User-friendly tools prevent skilled middlemen from monetizing their expertise, which stifles adoption of that tool. So on-sellable tools that are too easy-to-use, don't get on-sold.
Some examples by contradiction: tax returns, AWS Dashboard, many programming languages.