Are you saying you think their angle was to reach a conclusion that sugary information is addictive? It sounded like that was the starting point. What's the issue?
They didn't specify what kind of information in the header. So you could either assume ALL information is like junkfood and drugs, or you could assume people are filling up on information and becoming more intelligent (which I assume NO ONE assumed) or make any number of assumptions.
Case in point: the headline is too ambiguous.