Again, there's a difference between just changing something visually, and doing something which conflicts with prior continuity. The issue isn't that Klingons look different - the issue is there were numerous within-continuity references to the Klingons having hair. Therefore, saying all Klingons everywhere are bald, and have always been bald, sort of invalidates all the stories told before, from the asides in TNG and DS9 episodes all the way to an entire two-part story arc in ENT.
No, it just puzzles me why this should be a big deal now when this is at least the third time the Klingons have gotten a major makeover without an "explanation." Here's the real explanation: it's a TV show and they changed the makeup to freshen things up. No "in-universe" explanation is required. Just chalk it up to artistic license and enjoy the show.
I can see that. But the whole "augment virus" thing is canonical, which means that even if we can presume that "normal" TNG-era Klingons really look like they do in DIS, there should be human-looking Klingons out there as well. Which is one reason why the whole weird surgical procedure to make Ash into Voq was so insane. There was something within canon which would allow Voq to get to within 90% of passing for a human. Why they chose to ignore it I will never understand.
If the "Augment virus was never mentioned again I wouldn't miss it. It was a misstep that can be ignored. Better dramatic potential.
Any time Klingons were shown, up til DSC, they were shown with hair. That's within continuity. @eschaton, As to the way they look now, I look at it as a change in the visual, aesthetic, like they did from the original movies on. In fact, even in the TOS movies, the look of the Klingons changed. They were based on the TMP design, but varied in details. Like I said upthread, Worf's forehead changed from season to season, with no explanation.
Mot the barber goes on at length about Klingon hair when Worf goes in for a haircut in "Schisms;" DS9 made reference to Kahless forging the first bat'leth out of his own hair (or was it his enemies' hair? Either way.) That's just off the top of my head – no pun intended.
No, that much I got right away. If McCoy's tricorder could sniff out Arne Darvin in 'The Trouble with Tribbles,' Discovery's sickbay sensors wouldn't have broke a cybernetic sweat doing the same with even an Augmented Voq. (And who's to say they didn't use that as part of their recipe?) Voq had to be so completely 'human' - including internal anatomy, blood type, even genetic markers of the real Ash Tyler - that he could get past all but the most rigorous examination. ('That or maybe a Vulcan mind meld, and let's hope the Earthers haven't figured that out yet.") Given what we'd seen of the Klingons up to that point in the series, if you were one of the Discovery crew, would you have thought Klingons capable of that kind of sophistication - or subtlety? The only reason the whole thing fell apart was because 'Tyler's' mind did, and he asked Culber to take a much more in-depth look than a standard examination would have warranted.
I feel like this is at least the third time we've all gone 'round and 'round on this topic in the last few months, but to sum up the gist of those past discussions: because something in a story that defies logic and yet is presented without explanation severely disrupts the willing suspension of disbelief and pulls one out of the story. That's why. But a real-world explanation is never really a substitute for an in-story explanation. If you're reading a novel and the only apparent explanation for some otherwise perplexing narrative event is "because the author felt like it," that's not a well-written novel. Barring some deliberate stylistic choice to break the fourth wall, it's generally not a good thing for the authors of a work to call attention to their existence. It shatters the illusion. How was it a misstep? Perhaps it wasn't the best possible explanation for the change — there's room for debate about that. But it was certainly a darn sight better than none at all. Do you really think the Vog/Tyler story we got demonstrated any dramatic potential? If it had any that wasn't flagrantly wasted, I'd chalk that up entirely to the acting chops of Shazad Latif, not to the writing.
But that's the whole point, why would it need explaining? Why do people get so angry over this? Why does anyone even care? They've changed before and it took 26 years for an explanation, one that was done more for fun than necessity.
There is anger though, maybe not from you personally, but it's there throughout the fandom. Browse through the DSC forums and youtube comments, facebook groups and videos. People genuinely are feeling upset and betrayed about this. Why? What could possibly warrant that anger? Aren't there bigger questions in the world? The last change made no more sense either, not really. People retrospectively justify why it was different then but the fact is it was just as big a deal at the time and no one felt the need to explain it. Why do so now? Much the same could be said for the Romulans, the Borg, the Trill, the Tellarites. All of these species have changed appearance at least once without this level of backlash, why do the Klingons generate such a personal and heartfelt response, even though we know it's happened before?
Lots of things are canonical and make no sense, why start now? "Canon" is just a list of the officially produced and distributed material, not a holy writ as to what has been ordained as part of the Trek universe and therefore must be adhered to in the future. If we want it all to make sense I'm afraid that boat has long passed.
So many of us are T’Kuvma in the end, but lest we forget Picard and Picardo, who baldly went on regardless, and remember L’Rell, because we’re worth it.