Rubenerd

Betteridge’s Law of Headlines states that the answer to headings ending in a question is no. For example, “Does X cure cancer?” wouldn’t need the question mark if the answer was yes. It’s an exercise in journalistic hedge betting.

In similar spirit, I propose the Rubenerd Law of Headlines. If an article is titled with “Technology foo considered harmful”, there’s an unharmful, legitimate use for it. The author may even discuss it in their article.

These headings are marginally better than “you won’t believe why this tech is so harmful!”, but still clickbait.