the guardian reports that one of the less famous ones off take that has been removed from the lineup at a pride event in nottingham after liking the wrong kind of tweets. this is not particularly important to me, since i’m not into take that and i don’t live in nottingham. but the guardian thought the story was important enough to appear on the front page of its website. what they didn’t think worthy of reporting though, was the actual content of the tweets, which doesn’t appear anywhere in the article. i had to dig it up myself, and it’s about what you’d expect: generic kneejerk trans-agenda-plus-great-reset brain-broken-by-the-internet bilge. but obviously someone at the guardian decided that they ought not to platform such material; that readers can’t be trusted to encounter this material without their minds immediately collapsing into fascoid mush. and this is far from the first time they’ve done this. we’ve ended up with something deeply, deeply strange: a newspaper that seems to believe its main function is to protect its readership from the news.