For a little while the term Ive been using is Agendacitis because like the common cold you can be the carrier, receiver, delivery system or all three without effort. The approach is political narrative but the similarities are overwhelming and especially when using verifiable fact. Some examples on different issues:
Iraq violated No Fly Zone from 1991 UN Treaty, thus 2003 invasion justified. (NFZ was purely US invented policy and never in UN Treaty)
Bin laden admitted 9/11 attacks for first time? 2004, not 2001. http://www.foxnews.com/story/2004/10/30/bin-laden-claims-responsibility-for-11.html
Obama’s pastor said we deserved 9/11 as chickens coming home to roost. (He was in fact repeating what Ed Peck said days after 9/11, and not orignal source for the claim)
Bush admin said Saddam was grave threat following 9/11. (five days after 9/11 Cheney proclaimed Saddam was not a threat and bottled up http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/9-11_saddam_quotes.html)
G Zimmerman forced to shoot T Martin because he was being beat up. (Zimmerman never made the claim he fired in self defense from being hit. He claimed Martin somehow magically saw a 5 inch gun tuck inside pants on back right hip while laying on his back in the dark, while it was raining)
Desert Storm saved Iraqi lives (may 12th, 1996, our Amabassador to UN admitted our sanctions and bombings in Iraq killed 500,000 kids AFTER the 1991 UN Treaty)
Tons more but obviously the pull of narrative is equally effective in politics and business and even like the 4th Amendment, as if nothing was ever written into law if the wrong people are swinging the gavel.
The upside for corporate is people are generally far more likely to swing to the facts if presented in unambiguous terms where as in politics, we still have idiots claiming Hussein and bin Laden were like brothers and planned every single move towards each other.
It is far easier today to spread false information versus a thousand years ago and that is a frightening challenge.