I would argue that this could indeed be a valid experiment and could be used to measure the extent to which a random, unsubstantiated and potentially misleading quote or fact will make you question and evaluate your initial reaction to the primary cue (what you call main subject).
Possibly of use to print/poster advertisers and packaging designers? You fail to recognise that an image with text underneath is in itself also an image and will therefore trigger a second set of though processes that are also interesting to study and measure.
I lolled