WAR!! Archbishop launches attack on the US!!

That's what the headline reads: World Anglican Leader launches attack on US!!

Apparently, in an uncharacteristically decisive move, the archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, has dispatched the dreaded Lambeth Guard to attack the US! Their probable mission: to assassinate President Bush and his Cabinet! As everyone knows, the members of the Lambeth Guard (full title: "The Holy and Imperial Order of the Guardians of the Palace at Lambeth, defenders of the Most Holy Anglican Faith and Primate by Royal Edict and Divine Succor to the praise of God, Etc."), are trained from childhood in the arts of combat, infiltration, espionage and the proper use of the 1662 Prayerbook. They are far more elite even than the pope's Swiss Guard.

No doubt for fear of his own life, President Bush has been continuously airborne aboard Air Force One, surrounded by Secret Service agents and a large fighter-jet escort ever since the Archbishop announced his decision in a recent homily given at a ceremony commemorating the life of Ghandi. George W. Bush has reiterated that the enemies of the US must be destroyed, and has suggested that the Archbishop (and possibly all of the Anglican Communion) may be added to the official Axis of Evil blacklist. US reprisals against UK targets - London and Canterbury in particular - are feared, though the British government has made no formal statements at this point. Experts believe the Prime Minister, in consultation with the Royal Family, and the bishops of the Church of England, is studying the social and political implications for siding with the US against the Primate of All England. It is possible that deadly MI6 agents will be sent out as counter-operatives...

Or at least that's what I thought the article was going to say with such an...uh...exciting title.

So this leads me to ask a number of questions:

1) Is the title intentionally sensationalized or mis-leading?

2) Does the need to compete on the "news market" lead to a distortion of the purpose of news media - to facilitate a well-informed public (or is that even the purpose of News Media)?

3) Would anyone have read this article if it had a more realistic title like: "Rowan Williams makes critical comments not unlike those of many other religious and political leaders concerning Iraq"?

4) If the answer is "NO" what might that imply?

5) Does our current constellation of news media inhibit or facilitate (or neither/both) thoughtful and well-informed social debate?