Contractor due diligence finds a LinkedIn headline that still says "Director at City X" months after the person left that role. How should the researcher handle the headline?

When contractor due diligence finds a LinkedIn headline still saying “Director at City X” months after the person left, the researcher should flag the headline as potentially stale, date the observation, and check other public sources for the current role. Headlines behave like bumper stickers: they lag, and civic OSINT records what was visible when observed rather than treating UI text as today’s municipal org chart. Treating the headline as proof the person still directs that department fails by confusing a leftover title with current hiring authority or signature authority on city matters. Demanding that LinkedIn purge the profile as impersonation of a city official fails as a platform-moderation leap before the researcher has dated, sourced observations and alternative public role evidence that counsel can use. Skipping dating because headlines never change fails; titles do change, and undated notes become useless when roles shift across procurement cycles. Exam caveat: stale titles are common after job changes and are not automatically malicious impersonation of a civic official. Operational check: screenshot the headline with retrieval date; search current staff directories, news releases, and other public bios; update the due-diligence note with “as of” language and any newer role evidence before procurement relies on the title.