Like most everyone in the world today, I’m on social media. More and more (and, as elections near I’m sure even more and more) I’m seeing shared posts with strong opinions. Â However, when I go read the article (or the news report the article was based on) linked in the post, it bears little or no resemblance to the headline attached to it.
Case in point, the headline “BREAKING REPORT=> SMOKING GUN! US Was Running Weapons Thru Benghazi to Syria.” Â Now, according to the headline this looks pretty bad. Â But if you read the article (or many like it online, cause everyone’s a parrot), you’ll find no information or facts to support that headline. Â US intelligence knew about it, but they weren’t doing it. Â That’s bad, because they didn’t do anything about it, but it doesn’t mean the US was running guns. Â In fact, I felt like discounting the entire story based on the misleading (and unbelievable) headline.
Case two, from last year is this headline: “Germany Files War Crimes Against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld And Other CIA Officials.” No, they didn’t.  If you read the article, you’ll find the Federal Republic of Germany has not done any such thing.  A human rights group in Berlin has filed criminal complaints,  which they’re “pretty sure that Germany is going to take seriously.”  The majority of the article actually covers events that were originally reported 8 years before the article was written.
That’s all I care to find for now, but I’m sure in the 18 months between now and the Presidential election we’ll see many, many more.
