If I light a match and then yell “Fire” in a crowded movie theater, would I “misrepresent the facts of the case to the public”? That would create a “public outcry” just like the NPS did.

This is an argument from analogy. Such arguments are only as strong as the resemblance between the things being analogized. I would say this situation in no way resembles a crowded theater, where the patrons would be at imminent risk of death should a fire break out, and the news stories I read did not "yell" at me, nor consist of a single highly inflammatory word implying imminent fatal danger, and finally, none of the news stories were written by the NPS and so are not a good indicator of what the NPS actually wrote about the dispute in their news release and they should not be held liable for the misunderstandings or oversimplifications of others. Given all this, I'd say the quality of your analogy is very poor and misleading.