Tech Clickbait
Or “Why I Think There’s So Much Clickbait Tech/Coding Content Online”
In 2007, Jeff Atwood wrote a blog post called “Interactive Application Architecture Patterns.” He wrote that, when studying these design patterns, one should take the whole concept with a grain of salt — they are not the computer science equivalent of Newton’s Law Of Gravitation.
Full quote:
Another suggestion when studying and considering the use of interactive design patterns is to take the whole subject with a grain of salt. Many base patterns, such as those presented in the seminal work Design Patterns — Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software by Gamma, etc. al. are well distilled patterns which describe solutions to common problems in a implementation-agnostic way. Because of the nature of these patterns, scores of competing constructs aren’t generally found purporting to address the same concern. However, when entering the realm of compound patterns such as interactive application patterns, models, styles, etc., the study of such constructs can feel a bit like watching a documentary of the history of airplanes.
It’s best to think of architecture patterns as being as much in the realm of art as science. Interactive architecture patterns aren’t the computer science equivalent of Newton’s Law of Gravity. They merely represent our ever evolving attempt to apply the best approach for application development.
— Source, emphasis mine
As old as this blog post is, it aptly illustrates one of the most common themes in this industry: People disagree about a lot of things because there is no 100% correct way to do anything. Influential people come up with ideas, some people adopt the ideas, and then a conflicting group of people reject the ideas for one reason or another.
In an imaginary world, universal laws of software engineering would be discovered independently. Technologies would be carefully chosen, and every decision would be the most logical for a specific time and place.
Reality is a lot rougher than that. Sometimes things are adopted simply because a customer thought something was cool, or a CEO had a buzz word he used to impress people at a shareholder meeting, or because one very competent person down the hall was already familiar with some technology. Some programming languages, frameworks, and tools carry forward simply by inertia, and deadlines constantly hang over projects.
This is where much of the controversy online spawns from. Opinions are treated as facts. People produce strongly-worded online content, consumers push back, and the cycle of feedback promotes divisive ideas to the top. In other words, software is complex, company needs are diverse, and content creators can exploit this by creating clickbait headlines about the supposed best way to do things.
The Seeds Of Controversy
I will not call out any specific examples, I will just start naming trends I have observed on Medium, YouTube, and much of the Internet at large:
- Stop Using _______ articles
- __________ Is Dead articles
- “This Thing Will Definitely Happen In The Near Future” articles
- _________ Is An Absolute Game-Changer articles
JavaScript Is Dead. Software Engineering Is Dead. Stop Using React, Use Vue Instead. Titles like this stick because they create controversy, which leads to more clicks, which can lead to ad-generated revenue or paywall/subscription-based revenue. Sometimes, though, people just use titles like this to get attention.
Unsolicited advice is naturally annoying to a lot of people. If someone writes about how they had a positive experience switching from x to y, then good for them. The controversy begins when they tell YOU, the reader, that you absolutely need to do the same.
Some Other Reasons For Clickbait
- Paid content. Content creators on Medium, YouTube, independent blogs, and many other websites are paid to grab attention from as many people as possible, for as long as possible. To compete, titles and thumbnails are often catchier than the actual content
- Selling courses. It is easy to find tech content that manages to be somewhat educational and helpful, only to realize that its main purpose is to promote a course
- Fame. Social media “gamifies” attention, so it can be addicting simply realizing that clickbait content is garnering feedback
I will acknowledge that my own blog has sometimes been called out for clickbait. I am not immune to this criticism.
Another common trend with tech content are articles that simply predict the future. This is not unique to one industry — a reader with precognition could bet on winning companies, select winning lottery numbers, and join series A startups that were destined to succeed. It is very hard, even for the smartest people in the world, to predict the future. This will not stop a huge number of tech bloggers from proclaiming that something huge will occur, like AI replacing all software engineers within the next five years.
“Anti-Controversy”
Perhaps to counter the negative feedback opinionated claims elicit, some creators simply share really generic advice. The key to being a good programmer is getting shit done. The key to success is understanding business needs. Nothing is inherently wrong with generic advice, which is difficult to counter — the problem arises when such generic advice is prefaced with eye-catching titles like “How To Get Ahead Of 99% Of Software Developers” or “How I Became A 10x Developer.” Strong titles like this require more than generic advice.
Tech Content In An Ideal World
An imaginary, somewhat idealized world would consist of no clickbait. Every Medium title with the “software” tags would consist of a somewhat boring, detailed title, followed by the writer’s credentials, followed by a thorough account of exactly what he/she adopted, what effects it had on a certain scale (was it a small personal project, or did it actually have a major impact on a project with many users and/or a large amount of revenue?), and what was learned as a result. The writer would begin an open discussion with evidence-backed points, and readers with their own experiences would offer discussion and possible counters.
This is, of course, not the world we live in. As the writer of a Medium blog, I have the power to delete any comment that offends me and block any reader who disagrees with me. I can make bad claims, provide little to no evidence, then filter out anyone who tries to push back.
Closing Thoughts
Medium is not HackerNews. Medium even lacks the dislike counter Reddit has.
Instead of calling out specific blogs, I will just close by providing two parody blog posts that still managed to offend readers because many of them did not realize they were reading satire.
Though the two above are satire, they mimic how a lot of real Medium articles read.
