The trend of turning untested hypotheses into clickbait headlines is getting really bad. There is little evidence so far that the headline is true, it's just one hypothesis.
Not nearly as bad as taking one experiment and extrapolating as conclusive. To clearify, there isn't enough retesting of experiments to make good science from.
Or when an experiment's results have been challenged or disregarded yet people continue to recall the first experiment's results. For example, the Stanford prison psychology study.
However, yes, poorly constructed headlines meant to attract a click rather than true information is still bad. Though that might be a fault of the collective being more interested in snipping headlines without reading the articles behind it.
