Calling Ison the comet of the century is not very helpful, it creates great expectations for a comet which so far has been very disappointing. So far it has been very underwhelming vs. earlier predictions. Hopefully on the other side of the sun it will do something great, if it survives, but I don't think very many astronomers think that's terribly likely.
Yeah, I'd really like to see articles start making profound statements once the comet becomes a spectacle. Until then, let's just say "Hey a Comet is in the Neighborhood!".
Although I entirely see your point. I am not sure what expectations you have of an astronomical artefact, I mean it hasn't been particularly spectacular to us in an aesthetic sense, but it's certainly been interesting to see it's interactions, if only as data points.
I think the wider point I mean is that comets don't give a shit about how pretty they look to us, so it's a tad absurd to consider them disappointing.
I actually quite enjoy looking at it, along with Lovejoy which doesn't get as much press but also is quite visible to the naked eye at a really dark location. Both of the commets are great, if you're into that kind of thing, which I am.
However, I only meant to point out that it could really dissuade beginners from every trying astronomy again, if such a "spectacular" once in a lifetime thing is just a little smudge which they can barely see through a telescope, so faint so far in fact that it would be very difficult for them to even find. Unlike truly spectacular commets, which are plainly visible to the naked eye, and for which hitting the tail is easy and following it to the nucleus is easy enough (and exciting) even for a beginner. I'm afraid a lot of people are buying telescopes just for this and may be disappointed that they can't even find it. Hopefully they aren't too disappointed and can eventually make good use of their scopes.
PS: too see a really spectacular commet, check out pictures of commet Mcnaught from just a few years ago. Absolutely incredible.
