Skip to content 
If authorities have issued an emergency warning, the relevant agency should normally be named.
The phrase “See more” cannot substitute for these details.
Why “Five Minutes Ago” Can Be Misleading
There is another issue with the wording.
The phrase “five minutes ago” is extremely time-sensitive.
Five minutes after something happens, information may be incomplete.
An initial report may later turn out to be wrong.
A witness may have misunderstood what happened.
Early casualty figures may change.
Authorities may not yet have confirmed the identities of those involved.
For this reason, legitimate breaking-news organizations often distinguish between confirmed information and preliminary reports.
They may use phrases such as “officials said,” “police reported,” “according to preliminary information,” or “the situation remains under investigation.”
That language is important because it tells readers how certain the information actually is.
Breaking News Can Develop Quickly
There is nothing inherently suspicious about a story being only a few minutes old.
Major events genuinely happen without warning.
A natural disaster can occur suddenly.
A major political announcement can be made unexpectedly.
A transportation accident can happen at any moment.
A celebrity or public figure can announce something without advance notice.
News organizations may publish the first confirmed information within minutes.
But the speed of publication should not eliminate verification.
In fact, the more recent a story is, the more carefully readers should distinguish between confirmed facts and early reports.
The Danger of Filling in the Blank
A headline like “BREAKING NEWS Just in 5 minutes ago…” creates a blank space.
Readers naturally try to fill it.
This is where misinformation can become particularly dangerous.