The Kamala Harris campaign has been editing press headlines and putting the fake versions in ads as a way to spread disinformation. That's according to a new report that found multiple instances of Google ads being manipulated without the consent of the various news organizations linked to the false headlines.

🚨🚨 The Harris campaign has been editing news headlines and descriptions within Google search ads that make it appear as if the Guardian, Reuters, CBS News and other major publishers are on her side, Axios has found.

https://t.co/uW3VlgoXLK

— Jim VandeHei (@JimVandeHei) August 13, 2024

The Harris campaign has been editing news headlines and descriptions within Google search ads that make it appear as if the Guardian, Reuters, CBS News and other major publishers are on her side, Axios has found. 

Why it matters: It's a common practice in the commercial advertising world that doesn't violate Google's policies, but the ads mimic real news results from Search closely enough that they have news outlets caught off guard. 

• According to Google's ad transparency center, the Trump campaign isn't running these types of ads, but this technique has been used by campaigns before.
• The ads say that they are sponsored, but it's not immediately clear that the text that accompanies real news links is written by the campaigns and not by the media publication itself.

In true Axios fashion, the outlet tries to downplay what's occurring, calling it a "common practice in commercial advertising." I'm skeptical that's true. While it may be more common in a non-political context, I've never seen this happen in the political world. That's not to say that some ads haven't taken headlines out of context, but to actually change them and then stick them on Google as if they were real seems like a bridge too far. Yes, there's the "Sponsored" tag attached, but that doesn't immediately indicate to the average user they are fake. 

You do have to love that the first thing Axios did was rush to see if Donald Trump was doing it as well. That's their priority even in a story centering on Kamala Harris because, of course, it is. 

Here's a bit more detail as to what specifically is being done.

• Examples include The Independent UK, NPR, AP, The Guardian, USA Today, PBS, CNN, CBS News, Time and others, including local outlets like North Dakota radio station WDAY Radio. 
• The ads include links to real articles from the news outlets, but the headlines and supporting text have been altered to read as though the articles support the Harris campaign's objectives. 
• For example, an ad that ran alongside an article from The Guardian shows a headline that reads "VP Harris Fights Abortion Bans - Harris Defends Repro Freedom" and then includes supporting text underneath the headline that reads, "VP Harris is a champion for reproductive freedom and will stop Trump's abortion bans."

There is no doubt in my mind that this would be a major scandal if the Trump campaign were involved. Could you imagine the screams of "disinformation" and threatened lawsuits from press organizations? It'd be non-stop. Because it's Harris, though, it's no big deal. Here's Sara Fischer, who wrote the Axios piece, doing her best to glaze over what she found on social media. 

RELATED: CNN Gets Supremely Triggered Over Donald Trump's Interview With Elon Musk

Yesterday, Sara Fischer of Axios threw a fit on CNN over “disinformation” and Elon Musk allowing Trump to “say whatever he wants.”

Today, she’s hand-waving away the Kamala Harris campaign editing press headlines in ads to spread disinformation.

Incredible. pic.twitter.com/u69o0RP8dh

— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) August 13, 2024

As the link above shows, Fischer was hyperventilating on CNN about "disinformation" the day before this Harris story dropped because Elon Musk dared to give Trump a platform to speak to "say whatever he wants." Yet, you've got the Harris campaign caught spreading actual disinformation by faking press headlines, and Fischer is all shrugs. Is that surprising? Of course, not, and we all know she wouldn't be that charitable if the shoe was on the other foot.