To me, your comment sums up modern online discourse.

"Billionaire gives away all his wealth"

"BULLSHIT, HE ISN'T HOMELESS, THIS IS OFFENSIVE TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO WEALTH"

> To me, your comment sums up modern online discourse.

Misinformation is a problem in society today, and false headlines are a contributing factor. People, whether rightly or wrongly, incorporate false information from headlines into their model of the world, as surely not everyone is reading the entire article.

An honest writer can not compete with the clickbait headlines, so it tends to get worse and worse over time as they need to one up each other to invoke emotions to get the clicks.

I see nothing wrong with trying to fight back by pointing this out. I opt not to click on these types of links to avoid financially rewarding this type of behavior, however futile it may be. I also trust the source less since I’ve already been lied to in the first few words I read, so why should I bother continue reading?

However tiny the effect of this specific publication, it chips away at trust in society.

Deleted

This is "correcting" in the sense that someone is pointing at something and you're "correcting" people to look at the finger instead of the something. Yes, you are technically correct, but you aren't making any friends.

Well, let's fix Stavros' summary then. How about:

To me, your comment sums up modern online discourse. "Billionaire gives away all his wealth"

"BULLSHIT, LET ME RANT ON THE WORD CHOICE OF THE EDITORIALIZED TITLE".

Either defend your comments or actually delete them.

I choose to delete my posts/comments if I feel they’re too negative.