It's irrelevant to the article, though.
Including it somewhere in the article is reasonable. Going with Trump-Manafort-Blackops was an intentional attempt to mislead and make connections that don't exist.
Trump has nothing to do with this, so his name should not be the title.
And the term 'Black-ops' is hard to see as honest when referring to online trolling.
Can you really make the argument that this was not intended to misinform? They know how many people read only a title and run with it. They know what they are doing.
It's irrelevant to the article, though.
Including it somewhere in the article is reasonable. Going with Trump-Manafort-Blackops was an intentional attempt to mislead and make connections that don't exist.
Trump has nothing to do with this, so his name should not be the title.
And the term 'Black-ops' is hard to see as honest when referring to online trolling.
Can you really make the argument that this was not intended to misinform? They know how many people read only a title and run with it. They know what they are doing.
An article that has nothing to do with Trump, but TheGuardian still puts his name in the title.
Click-bait attention grabs and Team allegiance triumph over reason, as always.