'You'll never believe what happened next' and the like is guaranteed to put me off clicking on a link. So who does? And why do non tabloid sites like STW feel the need to do it, '7 reasons why the 2018 Scott Genius 900 Tuned is stoking our fire' for instance.
Click bate
Ouch! Sounds painful.
*waits for a correction with baited breath*
It really graits on me.
However, isn't any headline/link clickbait? just some more subtle than others?
Well you go me to look at this thread!
And yes it does if there's boobs.
Is this thread not a little self-selecting?
Is your STW headline really click bait? Firstly it’s presumably only seen by people who are here, secondly it presumably actually describes what the article says, thirdly bait suggests they are luring you into some sort of trap - what is that?
I think Mark confirmed that this was a conscious decision to increase hits, because all the evidence says it works.
I don't like it, makes the place look naff, but it's not my forum.
It's not spread to the magazine, thank God.
No, I never follow clickbait links. All part STW's desperation to fit in with the buzzfeed/Express website style to increase hits. Only a matter of time before we see cycle celeb paparazzi upskirt shots splattered all over the site, I reckon 😆
secondly it presumably actually describes what the article says, thirdly bait suggests they are luring you into some sort of trap – what is that?
the bait is that the article is going to be substantially more informative, interesting, astonishing than it really is.
A more appropriate article title would be: "A list of model features copy & pasted from Scott's PR puff that arrived in the inbox this morning"
If on the other hand the article included a paragraph on how this latest model of the Scott Genius is made from salvaged knee cartilage for a more compliant ride, available in metallic purple powdercoat and comes with a free tazer, then, well, the title is no longer click-baity.
Surely, the Scott Genius must be made of 7 individual, combustible components or have some sort of poker attachment in order to truly stoke someones fire ?
No. Definitely no. OK I lied, there was that one minor indiscretion I'm sure some of you remember? The one that will follow me around until the day I die
They have a lot to learn from some of the master baiters in the rest of the media.
Only a matter of time before we see cycle celeb paparazzi upskirt shots splattered all over the site, I reckon
There is nowthe Daily Mail style RH sidebar of shame, I guess.
EDIT: You won't believe what the the site update did next!
Personally I just find it tiring and patronising, both to the reader and the article author. I scan through headlines thinking, "someone's trying to hoodwink me into reading something that they clearly don't think sounds interesting on its own merit, and they think I'm going to fall for it".
It works on the wider population, though, so we'll have to put up with it. If I stop reading stuff and two other people start reading, it is what it is.
Almost as effective as chaturbate, I’m told.
Depends, you rapidly get to know which sites are going to repeatedly let you down and just give up on them completely.
Those that don't still get visited.
They are so common now and all the same, I'm amazed they still work..
"Just one simple trick..."
"Why you should never do this one thing..."
followed by an unbelievable dull article...
"Is your STW headline really click bait?"
No it isn't, though it adopts the style. One thing I've learnt from click bait is that even if you feel tempted, you will be desperately disappointed. My favourite are the "3 tricks insurance companies don't want you to know" type, and best of all are the ones where they put your locality in the title, but with a giveaway Merkan usage: "Stow-On-The-Wold moms are astonished by this new flashlight ... ".
Most alarmingly the Indy (it isn't anymore, are you?) and even the effing BBC have adopted stupid click-baity styles.
nope, adverts/clickbait headlines/flashing promotional guff will all boil my piss and i'll more than usually close the page - that clickbait headline news story over there (no, i don't care how good the crash is, with a headline like that you can gtf) ----------> " Possibly the most painful MTB video we've seen - and there's not even a crash!"
Guff like that panders to ****s, unfortunately it appears ****s are akin to rats in a box getting drip fed stimulants
The previous headlines were fine - funny, informative and reflected the high quality of journalism we expect from STW.
To borrow a phrase I heard somewhere, the new headlines are neither inspirational, nor aspirational.
They genuinely put me off looking at the articles.
Single moms in Hebden Bridge can't believe this one trick to remove earwax.
Those artisan candles aren't going to make themselves.
Oddly, there's now a huge disconnect between the magazine and the site.
The mag has moved upmarket in terms of presentation, the site downmarket. Different audiences obviously, but it feels strange nonetheless.
The aircrew couldn't believe what he was wearing on his feet and you won't either!
STW: closing in on parody faster than you'd have guessed...
7 amazing x-rays of dumb-ass bike maintenance accidents!
Every article heading that ever there was is essentially click bait.
7 amazing x-rays of dumb-ass bike maintenance accidents!
These forks were installed. What happens next will shock you!
The forum had a major revamp, you won't believe what happened next.....
😉
Anything that follows the "You'll never guess what happened next" format is guaranteed to put me off. Even if i'm intrigued I'll resist looking because I'd rather that format didn't exist and don't want to contribute towards its continued success.
As for on here. I only really use the forum, I probably click on less than a dozen articles a year so whatever format they're in doesn't really bother me
The articles are usually very good, which makes it even more annoying.
Every article heading that ever there was is essentially click bait.
Yes but it's the "Nine shocking genitals exposed celebrity wardrobe failures!" headline where the article is actually a review of kitchen appliances that are under discussion. Whereas "Ex-Charity boss sent Inappropriate texts" does what it says on the tin (to pick one example from the BBC news page).
Every article heading that ever there was is essentially click bait.
Apart from the ones you couldn't click on
Pedantic critic is pedantic shocker...
Every headline is designed to try to make you read the article, this is true whether it was pompei being buried in ash or 12 things that will s<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">hock you about Jennifer Aniston. </span>
Have to say this alteration in headlining is the first thing since I signed up as a subscriber to fund issue 1 that has had me considering whether or not to continue subbing :-/
I understand the two aren't directly related but I see the mag sub as at least partial payment toward this forum, and it's changed the flavour of the site for me.
Or if you prefer
This Change in Editorial WIll Make You Question Everything
I actively avoid Clickbait and for the most part they are painfully obvious.
"Number 18 will amaze you" etc but occasionally I get caught out. Apart from anything else, we have capped internet here in Spain and I can't afford to lose the data!
Every headline is designed to try to make you read the article
I disagree there.
Every headline is supposed to convey some information about the contents of the article.
Sensationalising the headline is not the same thing. We read what interest us. We also can be kidded into reading something that doesnt necessarily interest us, but has the potential to surprise us.
Im not particularly bothered about the characteristics of the new Scott Genius. A simple headline announcing the Scott Genius' arrival would be sufficient for me to know to give it a miss. However add a click-baity title and I have to overcome my natural desire to find out whether or not the new Scott Genius has a surprising feature that Scott dont want us to know about! That's a different game. My will is weak. Im bound to be disappointed.
The capital letters make them so unreadable, I never make it to the end of the link.
"Into The Wild: Backcountry Essentials – Part 2"
Erm, I think STW needs help with this one! How about - See 11 things you should take cycling, or you'll DIE!
I suspect that clickbait might work for a time, but ultimately erodes trust in the quality of "journalism". The BBC website has been using clickbait style headlines and content delivery for a while now, but ultimately the articles are devoid of interesting or content, and I find myself using it less and less.
When I look at the front page of STW now and see clickbait article titles near the top, I don't even bother looking for something that might interest me further down.
It's funny but until I read the thread I hadn't really noticed the change in headline style on the front page but now it's been pointed out to me I can't look past it. Interestingly the only article I've read is Backcountry essentials which is perhaps because it has the more sensible headline...
[i]I suspect that clickbait might work for a time, but ultimately erodes trust in the quality of “journalism”. The BBC website has been using clickbait style headlines and content delivery for a while now, but ultimately the articles are devoid of interesting or content, and I find myself using it less and less.
When I look at the front page of STW now and see clickbait article titles near the top, I don’t even bother looking for something that might interest me further down.[/i]
Exactly
To my shame, I clicked on the "possibly the most painful MTB video we've ever seen". And yes, it was some rather dull out takes from what could have been a rather dull video.
Thanks. Saved me a click.
I've just looked at the 'Is this the best tyre inflator?' thing in the name of research.
Guess what? It doesn't answer the question.
Both pointless and annoying.
What I wonder about migrating to a clickbait policy is whether the audience it attracts actually stays around. If the main revenue stream is ad-based then it probably works ok because it attracts more people, and presumably a higher proportion of those who are easily persuaded to click on adverts as well as headlines, but if the main revenue stream is sales-based then I wonder if it risks alienating the spenders in the audience for the sake of attracting transient, low-spend users. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't.
Just now I'm ill and generally feeling stupider than normal and I've ended up clicking on a load of "Look at these amazing abandoned places" and "People of walmart" sort of things, some of them have been pretty good. But never a You Won't Believe.
Clickbait's definitely proven to be effective but I don't feel like STW users are the normal targets.
Have you considered a remote control car?
What it did for my happiness during the winter months may surprise you.
2 Amazing Gifts that are Wasted on Ungrateful Teenagers......You'll be Blown Away with the Second One!
Are you saying this belly fat is here to stay?
You won't believe which SingleTrackworld thread gave me explosive diarrhoea!!
It works in that it cheapens this forum/website/community.
Another nail in the coffin.
I am actually curious to know what Annalise from Neighbours looks like now
But so far have resisted...
Is this one simple trick going to work or not? Mrs Spekkie is waiting . . .
I wrote headlines for a living for many years, including for some well-known websites with a young audience and a Buzzfeed-like tone. As an old-school journo I always enjoyed a clever pun, but it took me a while to get the hang of "doing" what people here are describing as clickbait (I may disagree).
As with all things there are degrees of clickbaityness, and STW's new headlines are on the milder end of the spectrum if they're clickbait at all. Really all they've done is got a bit longer, more conversational and more engaging - sometimes all at the same time.
It doesn't always work but I think they're getting the hang of it and are probably still trying to find the right tone.
To me clickbait means the cliched "and number six will amaze you" or "this is the reason Taylor Swift split up with Xyz" kind of stuff.
"7 reasons why the scott genius is stoking our fire" is a product news piece dressed up as a Buzzfeed-style listicle.
Saying "all headlines are clickbait" is of course correct from a certain perspective, but you need to be going somewhere with the observation really.
It's interesting thought. If the Icebike had been "7 highlights" or similar idI be tempted but current headline means I'll give it a miss. If it'd be "musings on Icebike" or similar and implying a more journalistic writing I'd be interested but expectations lower with current headline.
I think the OP might have deliberately used the incorrect version of "bait" to "bait" us 😉
The mag has moved upmarket in terms of presentation, the site downmarket. Different audiences obviously, but it feels strange nonetheless.
Can’t really comment on the site in general, I hardly ever bother looking at the homepage, as I’m not in the market for a bike, bike gear, or anything to do with cycling, but the forum is more upmarket now, it’s a cleaner, neater design, which looks that bit more sophisticated.
The content, however... 😉
I think the OP might have deliberately used the incorrect version of “bait” to “bait” us
The best clickbait is when you don't even realise you've been baited.
😉
