A solar eclipse happens when the moon blocks the sun, making it look like a big dark circle in the sky. Sometimes, you can look at this circle with your naked eye, but only if the sun is completely covered by the moon. This is called totality, and it lasts for a few minutes. If you try to look at the partial eclipse, when the moon is just hiding some of the sun, it's not safe because it can hurt your eyes. You should use special glasses or filters to protect your eyes. A man named Trump tried to look at an eclipse without these and he was wrong. There will be another chance to see a total solar eclipse in 2024. Read from source...

- The title of the article is misleading and sensationalist. It implies that Trump is an example to follow when watching a solar eclipse, which is not true or relevant to the topic. A better title could be "Safe Ways To Watch The Upcoming Solar Eclipse Without Damaging Your Eyes".
- The author uses the phrase "gaze at the solar eclipse" without clarifying that it refers to the 2017 event, not the current one in 2024. This creates confusion and inaccuracies for the readers who might think they can still watch the 2017 eclipse or miss the opportunity to prepare for the next one.
- The author cites a source who claims that pointing a phone camera at the sun is safe, without providing any evidence or credentials for this claim. This is reckless and irresponsible advice, as it could cause permanent eye damage to anyone who follows it. A more credible and cautious source should be used to support the argument against using solar filters or glasses.
- The author does not mention the risks of watching partial eclipses directly, which is the most common scenario for most viewers. This is a crucial piece of information that could prevent blindness or injury from looking at the sun with unprotected eyes. A balanced and informative approach should be taken to educate the readers on why solar filters or glasses are necessary and how to use them properly.
- The author ends the article with an irrelevant and unrelated link to another Benzinga story about iOS 17 features, which has nothing to do with the topic of the article. This seems like a cheap and desperate attempt to generate more clicks and traffic, rather than providing value and usefulness to the readers. A more appropriate and consistent conclusion should be used to wrap up the main points and recommendations of the article.