Probably pretty worked up, which is why the headline was phrased that way. If they said something like "Boeing seeks safety exemption for MAX 7 anti-ice system", it would communicate more information about the contents, but readers would be less likely to get mad and thus less likely to click.

Good use of headline editing then

I'm not sure that the actual content would ease up the situation as a "pilot failure" likely to happen in said procedure would end up catastrophic.

Boeing's argument is that it's not likely to happen, as it hasn't happened in the 6.5 million flight hours with other MAX models for which this procedure is approved.

Which don’t have this problem because the material used for the engine pod is metal and not fiber like with the uncertified models. This fiber is breaking up after five minutes of heating

Maybe? I like to think that the people affected are paying more attention than others, and aren't stupid. They'd know that "Boeing seeks safety exemption for MAX 7 anti-ice system" means "Boeing wants FAA to exempt MAX 7 from safety rules".

If I had read your headline I would have expected they were asking for an exemption so that the system could be used, not so that the plane could fly at all.

I think the one they went with was much better.