The title is highly editorialized (by the news agency/Reuters), and the article reads like something from a content farm - which I suppose is what a lot of smal

The title is highly editorialized (by the news agency/Reuters), and the article reads like something from a content farm - which I suppose is what a lot of smaller newspapers are. There's a vague attribution to "municipal authorities" for the "highly toxic" part of the title, even though "The municipality ... did not immediately respond to a request for comment." Later the article reveals that according to the company's claims "toxicity testing of April 11 showed extremely low levels of marine toxicity, capable of being completely neutralized by dilution." - so it's at the very least a contested claim, and yet used prominently just so that they can sensationalize the title. Also, > The key part of the article : > "Looters set fire to a UPL warehouse containing the pesticides during a wave of looting and arson in July last year. The warehouse (and the looting) was in South Africa, which wasn't clear to me on the first read through.