I went through an article announcing an agricultural trade fair. Nothing in it is false. It still scored poorly on a structural read, and the reasons are worth laying out. Twenty sentences. Nine verifiable facts, three opinions, six persuasive sentences, two neutral. What pulled it down:

• “30,000 visitors” with no source and no methodology
• scale figures (10 hectares, 300 exhibitors) presented without attribution
• the organiser and participating associations named but never quoted None of that is a lie. It is a promotional text wearing the format of a news report, and the format is what does the work. A reader who checks the claims finds nothing wrong, because the problem is not in the claims. This is the category I find most interesting and least discussed: text that is accurate and still misleading, because accuracy was never the mechanism. Does anyone distinguish these formally? “True but promotional” seems like it needs a better name than “native advertising”, which implies disclosure that is often absent.