The NY Times changed the headline of Jamelle Bouie’s opinion piece to be much less direct.

I haven’t been a Times subscriber in years and haven’t read anything from there for a while. The more I see this sort of behavior from their editorial team the more I’m convinced the Times is not worth the attention it’s getting. By no means it can be referred to as the paper of record.

The NY Times is a lot like Twitter. It’s an ongoing and escalating dumpster fire but it has so many eyeballs and attention people keep publishing and reading stuff there and triggering more complaints about them.

I get that the second headline is more clickbaity to draw in more curious readers (and page views) because the first headline will definitely be rejected by those who aren’t interested in the issue or will reject anything defending trans rights, but when you read Parker Molloy’s piece, it tells you that the headline change is much deeper than that. It’s more plausible that it’s a deliberate act against the trans community even if they try to argue it’s not the intention.

The NY Times have responded to the claims of being anti trans with a statement published by Nieman Lab. If ever there was a statement that nobody but the writer believes in it, this would be it.

‘Undesirable’ sites. Wrong. Those sites are ‘desirable’

Indonesia’s Internet censorship plan faces stumbling blocks

Indonesia’s deeply religious Information Minister wants a porn filter in place before the start of Ramadhan this year, just over a week away.

Industry experts cast severe doubts on the plan and explains why. To run a filter would severely tax the country’s already slow Internet connections and place a heavy burden on Internet providers all over the country.

Despite the demand, there has been no move by the Ministry to determine what is and what isn’t acceptable according to the minister’s standard.

Indonesia’s Internet censorship plan faces stumbling blocks