I do not understand what about the title is linkbait. If you are circulating any sort of file you should announce the presence of malware or remove it.
> I ought to be clear from the outset: I have no information linking Wikileaks, Asssange, Hammond, Monsegur, the FBI or anyone else directly with these malicious files. That very well may change quickly as research progresses, but at no point should this post be considered finger pointing. The purpose of this post is not to assign responsibility but to ensure that the journalists and activists downloading these files or who have already downloaded these files understand the consequences and take proper precautions. If I can encourage security researchers to take a look at these files it would be a bonus.
Also answers your question of "why the [arguably] click-bait title?" To get attention, which it deserves.
The problem is "loaded" which has two rather different meanings in this context. "X is loaded with Y" can just mean that X contains a lot of Y, but it can also mean that someone loaded a lot of Y into X. If you go for the second meaning, which is an entirely natural reading of the original headline, then the headline is saying "Someone (such as the NSA or their friends) put a lot of malware into this stuff."
As to the "why" question (which for the record was not mine) I don't think it's justifiable to use a misleading headline just because the information is important. Although I imagine the misleading nature of this headline was entirely unintentional.
I parsed it as "Loaded" as in the way I like my Baked Potatoes "Loaded" with Sour Cream and Bacon.
I can see how you parsed it the other way.
Reading the authors other posts--would it be worth giving him the benefit of the doubt that the author wasn't trying link bait?