The New York Times raking WordPress.com over the coals for its refusal to censor its users is an egregious double standard. A publication cannot call for free speech for itself while eating up the rights of everyone else they don’t agree with. Principles aren’t principles if they only serve you when they are convenient.

Although I agree with many parts of the article — including the fact that the article in question should have better explained (and that the author should have better understood) the differences between being a web host and a social network, I have to comment to disagree with this passage.

News organizations — good ones anyway — are able to publish content that doesn’t always align. It’s part of the process and frankly, is part of the free press.

Although the traditional distinction is between editorial and news, those layers often intersect.

So to me, the NYT signing an editorial op-ed calling for freedom of speech and protection of the press while also reporting and arguably criticizing a different speech scenario is completely fine.

That isn’t to say I’m not bothered by the slippery slope of hosts removing content that doesn’t violate laws (child pornography, for example), because no matter how egregious the content, a web host making those decisions DOES bother me. (That said, the Automattic response in regards to photos and targeted harassment messages bothers me too).

But I would be more bothered by a news outlet that would refuse to publish editorials that disagree with the opinions or reportings of others.