[philosopher1234]

They might not settle on that as the most likely interpretation, but I would bet money that it was one of if not the first interpretation that came to mind for most. I think title authors are accountable for such things, and less discriminating readers will not make their way all the way to more reasonable interpretations.

[cogitoergofutuo]

It is not the author’s job to proactively search out and adjust for crazy interpretations of mundane sentences. That rule would be funny.

“NOAA reports record hurricane activity — BUT DON’T WORRY HAARP ISN’T INVOLVED” would be a hilarious but pointless headline.