• nicolairathjen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s one way to look at it. Another way is to see it as entertainment trying to get you to watch, not a lecture trying to be concise.

    Also, the question in the title has an answer which I think is far more interesting than the one given in the comment a few levels above this, and that is the answer the video gives. Sometimes the story told on the way to giving an answer can be more interesting than the actual answer, and this video, as a bonus, goes through the basics of DNS in a way that is digestible for a casual viewer. In my opinion, these are all more interesting than a guy writing “it’s .de”, and are all valid reasons for the video to be titles as it is.

    • hydrospanner@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s one way to look at it. Another way is to see it as entertainment trying to get you to watch, not a lecture trying to be concise.

      Hmmm what’s worse: giving a video a shitty and misleading title because you’re a dumbass…or giving a video a shitty and misleading title very intentionally because you’ve decided that the content isn’t good enough to draw viewers on it’s own and have therefore decided to deceive people into clicking and watching based on said title?

      • nicolairathjen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        When have the titles of entertainment ever been about anything but drawing in an audience? Do you also get mad at the title of movie “Who Framed Rodger Rabbit?”, or do movies have a pass? What about “Who’s afraid of Virginia Woolf?” These are all entertainment that use a question for the title, even if the answers are not the reason to watch this.