You have to read further down to know that it was someone assigned to argue this point of view - not that it was a study or review where someone looked at research and came to that conclusion. Reading the abstract and title did not give me the impression that someone was assigned to make that argument. Those are very different
An abstract is supposed to be a summary. Many people will read only an abstract since they think they are just getting a shorter version of something and stop there
Since it's clearly described in the text exactly what the topic is about, is it not enough to read to understand what it is about?
And it has not a click-bait intent. It hit the character limit.