The case in three lines. A striking photo of the Mill Lane underpass under floodwater runs on the Green Gazette's front page, captioned as last Tuesday's storm. Traced back through a neighbour, a group chat and a reverse image search, it turns out to be a five-year-old photo from another town's paper, cropped so the road sign and a red bus fell outside the frame. The underpass really does flood, so the story is true and the picture is not, and Tara is handed the empty caption box.

One question to ask. "What should the caption say?" Then: "Was anyone in this story lying?" Probably not, and that is the point.

One thing to do at the table. Pick an image you have both seen shared this week. Ask two questions about it together: where did it first appear, and what might be just outside the frame? Notice when you cannot answer the first one.

The grown-up layer. The case separates a true claim (the underpass floods) from a false one (this photo shows last Tuesday). Out-of-context images are among the most common kinds of misinformation precisely because the image itself is real. The habits it models are lateral reading, tracing to the oldest copy, checking the edges of a crop, and crediting the person whose work it is.

The case leaves the caption blank on purpose. Ask for it before you offer yours.