and their info section shows that they only analyzed websites. "In order to analyze these websites..."
i get what you mean, but i think that's a bit more about reading comprehension than what they've been doing.
Case in point:
> Remember, these trackers are made so that they can track your online behavior, and follow you wherever you go on the internet. Having even 1 of them on your website really defeats any argument for ultimate privacy and anonymity.
Tell me that isn't trying to scare the reader into thinking the trackers can follow your activity while using the VPNs.
nonetheless, the research is still valuable. not very surprising that those antivirus companies with vpns have such huge numbers of trackers
"Top VPNs Recording Users" <-- By itself, this sounds bad and forces me to read the article to get more info. Most people won't, and it muddies the water. Recording users implies that they are somehow recording the browsing history of people using their VPNs. This is the immediate connection a non-technical and technical person would make here. Let's be honest.
"Potentially Leaking Data When Visiting Their Sites" <-- What does this even mean. I am leaking what data, and how would I be leaking it to their site? Why is this pertinent and what does it have to do with them recording users? Are they recording users history and leaking it to their own sites?
So many questions, so much click-bait. The net result is that I had to waste time trying to figure out whether this article was correctly backing up what its title conveyed. I have now given them ad-views, trust the VPNPro website even less, and the web is less well off in general because some > 0 amount of people will start mistrusting VPNs and VPN-review sites.
It's like a title saying "US government tracks travelers when they visit the US"
I wouldn't right off the bat assume that the US gov't is tracking all travelers all the time. I'd assume it's only when they land in the US
I'd rewrite your example as below in order to more clearly illustrate how I view the VPN title:
US DoHS Keeping Track On World travelers movements, potentially leaking data when visiting the US.
Note the main title, then the comma, and then the minor clarification. Firstly, the "main" point is at the beginning so that's the one that has the most effect and evokes an emotional response that colors the entire reading. Secondly, the last portion is separated with a comma, adds two points, doesn't clearly state how it modifies the first part of the title and is also ambiguous on its own. It vaguely confuses that tracking happens when they visit the US with the interpretation that the tracking happens all the time but only leaks when they visit the US. It also allows your interpretation that they only tracking while they visit the US. The comma should at the very least have been an "and".
If we wanted a real title that wasn't click-bait, here is my stab at it:
Top VPN providers record website-visitor's click/browsing behavior on their sites, potentially leaking it to metric providers with various degrees of anonymization.
OR.
Analysis of User-Behavior Tools On VPN Providers' Sites. <- This last one shows we can have an honest internet that isn't driven by click-bait, and could instead rely on the integrity of publications and the authors.
Even with you changes it still looks easy to tweak or turn into click bate. "Potentially" is a weasel-word, because even safe things could potentially go wrong.
"Every time you fart you spread germs, potentially infecting everyone in the room around you with cholera or other diseases"
> I don't know what you can see, but the
> full title shows that it's about websites
When the acronym is expanded, the title strongly suggests a problem with the networks, not VPN providers.
"Top VPNs are recording users and potentially leaking their data when they visit their website"
I had to truncate it here to fit