Wow quite really interesting to know about such information

I think people recognise potential click baiting and it's definitely different From picking a synonymous title to elevate or increase a chance of one wanting to see a video by all means. YouTube structure is definitely filled of click baiting but you're right there is nothing wrong when we try to use attractive titled to make people watch the video.

>only a myopic framework would really focus on those as the issues

Geez that was what I was thinking when I seen your post today, all irrelevant  to

>we want to do the most good possible

which today would be exposing the democratic lead presidential candidate for abuse of his power when vice president.

>It's not the deepest or most important policy analysis but it gets a lot of attention and it brings people in our universe who then are in our universe when we want to do our analysis about government policy of social media  (when highlighting Trump)

I would describe you post today exactly that, not the deepest or most important policy analysis but it does protect the people in your universe from learning about the abuse of government policy by Biden and his son.

>If I am well prepared to refute bad ideas and the ideas are bad enough that there is some benefit to refuting them or exposing them, whatever the case may be, I have no problem with responsible platforming those people.

I'd say the Biden & son issue falls within being bad enough,  but then their is no benefit to refuting proven claims of one's top leading democratic presidential contenders...should I just take it your are ill prepared?...or

>what is the line between getting people's attention versus being deceptive

I think I know from your post today what the answer to that is.