NEW YORK ( TheStreet) -- Yes. That's a provocative headline. Designed to make you click. Pretty amazing, isn't it, that we do that in this business. We actually want to catch your attention at the front door, so you'll walk in, spend some time, use the back door and do it all over again sometime soon.
Sort of like the television or radio programs that "tease" really interesting things right before a commercial break. Or the music act that saves their best songs for the encore.
Truth be told, most people who complain about outrageous headlines don't actually have a problem with the outrageous headline. They just use the spectacle of the headline to project annoyance with an argument their psychological filters keep them from considering. So, ironically, they are are much more nefarious and suspect in their use of the headline than we are.
Because, really, if this headline read
Why Amazon Sucks As An Investment, But Apple Doesn't
(AAPL - Get Report)
bulls would fill the comments' section with fist pumps and chest bumps.
would call me a genius over at
. And nobody would defend
(AMZN - Get Report)
because that's totally uncool.
But I'm your friendly hipster journalist, defending Amazon before it was even cool to do so.
With the headline as is --
Why Apple Sucks As An Investment, But Amazon Doesn't
-- this article, in the eyes of the most vocal commenters, Apple supporters and Amazon haters becomes everything that is wrong with journalism in the year 2013. Funny, how that works, eh?
I tend not to do charts. Why? Because I don't learn that way. I prefer words and thoughts. However, this one bears reprinting. It compares AAPL vs. AMZN performance-wise over the last year.
After every seemingly so-so Amazon earnings report, AMZN haters claim this is it. The arrival of doom. The end of a multibillion-dollar online retail pioneer that created, dictates and owns the space. I respond the same way each time. The stock will drop, pop and regain relatively solid ground. We're seeing that this week as AMZN gets set to flirt with 52-week highs . . . again.