It could be worse than "post now, edit later".

The author could propose a list of a few possible headlines, say 10, each more or less urging/click-baity/informative. Then let an algorithm choose the most click-baity headline as visitors click on the headlines in ads or in Google news (using AB tests or multi-arn bandit algorithms).

I don't know if any news site does this yet, but it could explain the increase of click-baity or uninformative headlines in Google news.

I wonder if it's even really about the editing process. It seems possible to me that they intentionally start with a more provocative headline to get more early traction for an article, and then switch to the more neutral title as an article gains views. I could even imagine it being A/B tested early to see which headline will get them the most shares.

In addition to the usual copyedit tweaks, headlines are the thing that editors are more likely to go in and make more attention-grabbing, even if they become less neutrally factual in the process. This isn't really anything new although of course historically it was done before the issue actually went to press.

all news sites do this now.