Or better: How Plants Benefit from Ants, and Ants from Plants.
How can a science-centric site get it so wrong?
How can a science-centric site get it so wrong?
Write software that A/B tests various titles. Measure the income from advertising click-throughs. Expand to A/B test various articles as well, optimizing for appeal to the kind of bored person who is susceptible to ordering miracle skin-creams at 2am.
Presto, crappy click-bait.
Editorial: Perhaps instead of blaming the public, science should look in the mirror, as well as hold those between it and the public accountable for errors, inconsistencies, hyperbole, confusing correlation with cause, etc.?
If you leave a publishing journal to optimize for views and/or clickthrough revenue, it becomes a dumpster fire.
If you don't want dumpster fires, somebody has to establish a set a of values and enforce them, even if they have "costs" in terms of popularity/clicks/attention.
or more accurate:
How ads favourable to humans gained reproductive advantage.