Because there's ambiguity and ignorance around the language of sex crimes. In a legal sense. We're all somewhat confused. It takes some effort and time to suss it all out.

The author used inappropriate wording on a self publishing platform. Self publishing. An editor would have caught that and made the correction before publishing.

It does not follow that the author was intentionally conflating or generating click bait. It follows that she made a journalistic error. On a self publishing platform. The tenor of the whole of her article does not suggest she's using click bait titles for some nefarious scheme. She seemed genuine, and trying to make a point. A point that "97%" is a small part of.

A small comment saying, "I think you meant harassment here, not assault" would have sufficed to make your point, without undermining her entire article with spurious charges of "click bait".

It comes across as petty and gaslighting. Like your feelings of being "duped into reading an article" with one inaccuracy are more im
portant than the very real world problem with misogyny women have to live with and deal with every day.

Women cannot even talk about it without being trolled and harassed by men online or casually dismissed in real life.

Your comment was not trolling, but it provides a foothold for those who would.