The article is giving you the answer to the question. The real world has this thing called uncertainty. There are a lot of different ways things could go, amd if the article said itll be uber in 4 months exactly, that would be total bull. If the only thing people consider "worthy" reporting is reporting that oversimplifies hard questions and pretends there no uncertainty to give simple, pleasing and wrong answers, and the reporting people consider "worthless" are articles that grapple with the complexity of a situation ultimately leading to unsatisfying answers but with a sense of why its unsatisfying, well, that would make sense with what news reporting looks like today.
If you don't know then title the article "Why we don't know when Corona will end," so I can save my time. This article deliberately link-baits by purporting to answer a question and then giving a non-answer.
> I didn't need an article to tell me "dunno lol". I knew I didn't know already.
But I think a lot of people don't know that they don't know. There are lots of problems where the scientific consensus is in, but the will isn't there to implement it—whether due to denial of the science or to fear of the costs. This is a situation where the scientific consensus isn't in; no-one knows for sure—and that's not a state in which the modern person is used to living, or realising they're living.
> But I think a lot of people don't know they don't know
I think that's generally true, but probably not in this particular case. In any case, the answer of "We don't know" is only three words long and could have been put in the headline, but then it wouldn't have been exploitative clickbait...
