Reubend
an hour ago
> A University System Went All In on A.I. Now It’s Tearing Itself Apart.
The NYT often has a bias against AI, but the article's contents are actually a pretty reasonable summary of the different attitudes towards AI in academia. Then they went and slapped a terribly sensationalist headline on it, which doesn't seem well supported by the actual article.
frereubu
42 minutes ago
If the NYT is the same as British newspapers, the person who wrote the article doesn't write the headline. It happens here too, and its really annoying because often the article has a much more nuanced picture than the headline would have you believe. In an era when people do read the article after reading the headline it's somewhat forgivable - getting someone's attention then they get the nuance, but in the internet era when people just read the headline it's anachronistic.
kibwen
39 minutes ago
> If the NYT is the same as British newspapers, the person who wrote the article doesn't write the headline.
This has been the case for essentially all newspapers since time immemorial. Reporters write the articles, editors write the headlines.
js2
33 minutes ago
While true, NYT took a clear turn towards clickbait headlines in the last 5-10 years. It used to have more self-respect.
kibwen
20 minutes ago
I don't discount that it's possible that NYT headline policy could have changed in the last decade, but sensationalism when it comes to newspaper headlines is the historical norm. "Clickbait" is an ancient phenomenon:
"In A History of News, Mitchell Stephens notes sensationalism can be found in the Ancient Roman gazette Acta Diurna, where official notices and announcements were presented daily on public message boards, the perceived content of which spread with enthusiasm in illiterate societies."
reactordev
19 minutes ago
It’s all AI now
Cyclone_
an hour ago
There has been quite a few articles in that paper where the headline is really designed to be clickbait.
laughingcurve
19 minutes ago
Classic NYT