Regardless of the voracity of your definition, 'Campaign Hack' would have been a much clearer, less ambiguous, and more precise term, especially given that this

Regardless of the voracity of your definition, 'Campaign Hack' would have been a much clearer, less ambiguous, and more precise term, especially given that this is an ongoing story with which most readers are already familiar. In a perfect world, the headline would be intended to provide unambiguous information. In that, it demonstrably fails as evidenced by this thread. In the real world, it must convey information, but also hook eyeballs. So while the term 'election hacking' may not be explicitly wrong, and while I do not fault the Times for going with it, it is at best ambiguous and quite probably meant to grab attention more than convey information.