← Back to context

Comment by ghgr

18 hours ago

They weren't "missing": GPS-tagged red-footed falcons revealed that they migrate to a tiny communal roost in central Angola (“Falcopolis”) each February–March.

There, saved you a click (disappointed on National Geographic for that clickbaity headline).

Is this actually clickbait? The title is in the form of many clickbait title, but I'd argue it delivers; the article is more interesting than the title.

I suggest readers spend the click and the five minutes.

They were missing. Then they used GPS tags to locate them.

That’s why the article is titled “ A Million Falcons Went Missing. Here’s How They Were Found”.

Something was unknown, then we used sensors to solve the mystery. Wild, isn’t it?

  • According to the dictionary definition of "missing", they were not missing.

    At best, our assumptions about where we expected to find them were wrong.

    • What dictionary are you using?

      I just looked it up and MW’s definition of “missing” is “absent” or “lost” or “needed or expected but not included”. Dictionary.com says “absent, not found, or lost” and “lacking”. Wiktionary says “Not able to be located; gone, misplaced”, “Not present when it (they) should be”, and “Of an internal combustion engine: running roughly due to an occasional lack of a spark or other irregular fault.”

      1 reply →

> disappointed on National Geographic for that clickbaity headline

I don't think there's a single name brand from "before internet" that has survived without turning into a clickbait chaser of ad revenue above all else.

The term for this is "late stage capitalism".