OK, the actual statement made by Melania's camp (as seen on screen at 1:10):
"I don't believe Mrs. Trump has ever discussed her thoughts on anything with Mr. Giuliani."

That's a pretty significant nudge. To me, pretty clearly says "don't put words in my mouth". You can infer it as "don't put words in my mouth, you weaselly little prick", but the statement itself is pretty carefully reserved in the exact wording.

Newsworthy? Sure. But to me, I think a good journalist (and I'd usually include Anderson Cooper in that camp) should show the statement itself, without any opinion or commentary first, and then make a distinct segue showing that we're now moving into pundit's reactions and opinions.

The lead here was "First Lady Melania Trump's Office Fires Back at Rudy Giuliani Over His Remarks About Stormy Daniels". That just seems a bit clickbait-y to me. "Fires Back" requires reading between the lines of the statement itself. Accurate? Probably. But I think they should have honored the carefully worded nature of the actual statement and gone with something like ..."Responds to" instead of "Fires Back".

Furthermore, they should have kept the full text of the statement itself up on the screen during the whole reaction/opinion portion segment where Cooper and the other talking heads discuss things. By all means, discuss. I even mostly agree with their interpretations and take on the situation. But keep the text of the actual statement up so that viewers can decide for themselves.


The Daily Show with Jon Stewart was actually fantastic for hoisting people on their own petard by fairly and accurately showing their actual statements and reacting to them -- no bait and switch / obfuscation necessary. Stewart's kind of subtlety in pointing out contradictions and bullshit was awesome.

I guess I feel like the best response to Trump's "Fake News" shtick is to be doubly rigorous when it comes to journalistic integrity. Trump's gonna give you plenty of ammo to use against him. Use it, but do it in such a way that any allegations of bias or unfairness are clearly wrong.

Congratulations! Your video, Clickbait, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 4 Badge!

Your video, Clickbait, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

downvote for blatant clickbait thumbnail

Seems to be a rambling diatribe with no clear path other than "tourism changes stuff"...

Think the vid title was a little clickbait-y though... = P

I do agree, but on the other hand sometimes these things go well beyond legitimate "questions about your actions / statements / plans".

Subject even the most patient person in the world to enough stupid / leading / clickbait-y questions, and eventually they'll get annoyed with it. Which is of course the entire point, so that they can clip that reaction out of context and run it with a headline like "Watch as Senator X flies off the handle after being asked a simple question!"

Some of these incidents are definitely sleazy politicians trying to weasel out of scrutiny to the greatest degree possible. But I'm sure that many of them are the political version of Marshawn Lynch just wanting to do his goddamn job without being constantly peppered with pointless questions from the media. And we all thought he was awesome for showing up to media days and saying only "I'm just here so I don't get fined", right?

Not trying to trivialize the political arena down to the level of a public spectacle like professional sports, but I think the comparison is at least a little valid.

At no point in the video was there an explanation that came close to answering why it is almost impossible to run a two hour marathon. Or why only a handful of people could ever come close to it.

In fact, a lot of parts seem like they were created in a rush. At one point he says that mid 60s is "nowhere near" 70 or 80. When the average is 40? Is the scale logarithmic? If so it wasn't mentioned.

I'm very grateful for the information i did learn in the video, it was a nice little bit of info about running and runners. But it fell far short of investigating the 2 hour mile or answering the questions it posed. I wish videosift will not become a home for clickbait.

With respect, I don't think clickbait style titles work very well with long videos. For example, the title made me question 'what is the advice about?' but when i opened the video it needed a 20 minute commitment to find out. A better description would help me to know whether this is something i would be interested in watching.

So fucking downvote it. I know the thumbnail of puppies and kittens, along with the title of "this is specific clickbait for newtboy" can be misleading.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGGfnLBTLdY

I would have been more impressed if this was about someone that never clicks on clickbait. Funny enough I suppose.

One might argue that people that see racism in facetious double entendre clickbait titles should just chill.

Title was clickbait...where was the destroy.

This is the contender for the 2016 clickbait olympics

"clickbait is written by a human"

Well, not necessarily. Not because the kind of people who write this bullshit are sub-human (although they might be), but because machine written articles are becoming increasingly popular and harder to spot.

On one hand, this is great. It means that actual writers don't have to waste their time on this bullshit.

On the other hand, the prospect of millions of clickbait articles generated at the touch of a button is terrifying.