Maybe but that area is close enough to the stadium. What? A three minute train ride? Or a drive about just as short if not for game traffic? The issue isnt whether the Flushing Asian food courts are better. It's about restaurants that are reasonably close to the stadium that are, in the writer's opinion, worth trying. Close enough to the stadium that it would make sense to tie a visit to one of those joints to taking in a ballgame. I think your post is a stretch, that the piece is primarily about generating clicks. Generating clicks is the point of everything. They are running a business that makes money on ad views. So since all their articles, and most other other sites articles except the very few without ads, are about clicks, lets move beyond that. Its a fine article in comparison to other articles. The Mets are damn affordable once you consider that unlike say the Knicks, they allow outside food into the stadium. You really dont need to spend more than the ticket prices and metrocard swipe. Then by that logic, everything the NYT publishes is "garbage". Same for WAPO. And The New Yorker. And The Athletic. Even before the web and clicks, print magazines like Sports Illustrated, recognizing that the cover subject impacts the bottom line, largely phased out less profitable horse racing and track and field covers in favor of more profitable major team sports covers like football and baseball. That's not grounds to dismiss the reporting out of hand. No, I was agreeing with you but from a different angle. The Ads are always the priority so posting that 'the article is about clicks' is pointless, they all are. so lets move beyond that and judge the article in comparison to other articles. and by the way, for those who don't subscribe - there are very few ads on The Athletic.