Those of use that really want to know more, will read the article on its own merit, because we’re interested, not because we’re being manipulated into a deeper curiosity than warranted.
Meanwhile, complaining about aggressive journalistic tactics is not forum sliding. Keep in mind, beyond linguistic syntax, semantics and other trivial technical matters, much of HN doesn’t qualify as experts on non-technology-oriented stories, and political tripe. Some articles aren’t colored up very much by HN peanut galleries and bike shedding. This is might be one such instance.
Anyway, when we notice deceptive practices we complain about them.
I also don't agree that such threads drown the conversation. Often they're buried. Sometimes they are a healthy part of the conversation itself. Sometimes there's a passive aggressive argument about whether or not the conversation is healthy and hey maybe even that's healthy!
Or at least, given a substantial visibility penalty.