So the title you gave was not, in fact, the title of the web posting. It is customary here on FR to use the web page title as a posting title. If the page itself is a repost of something else (as this one is), then people do use the original posting's title, but you didn't do that; you made up a title that was misleading, as it states something happened that didn't.
I say it's misleading because using cover stories, backup stories, and other media manipulation so as to get your side of a story out is not lying, unless they contain statements that are not true. It's certainly true that by couching truthful statements properly, people who listen uncritically might draw erroneous conclusions. But that's not telling lies, as people with critical faculties can tell.
The title you made up includes "How to Lie to 60 Minutes". But no one, in fact, did lie to 60 Minutes.
And even if you think that spin doctoring is a lie, then even in that light your title was a lie, since at the most favorable interepretation of it, your title was "spin doctoring" the content of the posting.
Am I splitting hairs? If so, distinguishing lies from truth is worth it.
And, indeed, this is a specific case story about "how to lie" to the media.
Tell me where the PR manager ever advocated or described telling a lie to 60 Minutes, as opposed to presenting truthful information that gave his viewpoint.