For those who laugh at this problem and write it off as web silliness, this exact sort of naive substitution has actually contributed to the result of a major U.S. Federal Court case on at least one occasion.
The case was 2005’s Kitzmiller v. Dover, regarding teaching intelligent design (ID) in schools. A key element in the case was whether ID was actually just creationism in disquise. This is because the Supreme Court already ruled that creationism is off limits in public schools back in 1987.
The plaintiffs subpoenaed early drafts of the ID textbook that was going to be used in this particular school. They found this weird term cdesign proponentsists several times in the book. The editors had done a naive search and replace of creationist for design proponent (or some variation of that). This proved to the court that what they were talking about really was creationism.
Many details including scans of the pages here:
http://www2.ncseweb.org/wp/?p=80