Headlines shape how most people think about and engage with the news, so the choice of just a few words is vital to determining how people frame a story in their minds. Playing The New York Times Simulator, I was reminded of a conversation with artist Alexandra Bell I attended in journalism school. Bell, a graduate of the Columbia Journalism School, discussed her art series “Counternarratives,” which presented large-scale versions of real New York Times pages that Bell had edited to highlight the inherent biases embedded in the news media and challenge the idea of objectivity.

The New York Times Simulator is hitting on the same themes. As a piece of art meant to radicalize players against a systemic issue in society, it gives them the power to stop being passive themselves and take action. It is entirely within the player’s power to determine what news is fit to print and how to present it.

Amazing masterpiece, the kind of game I'd love everyone to play, from my pupils at school to my mother who does not question the reality of the stuff she hears.
In this mini game you have to decide the relevance that each news has in the main page of the NYTimes, being careful (or just trying to piss off) the main sponsors of the newspaper: the police, Israel and the rich people. Changing the title of news is so effective in the game that makes you wonder how many times did you get trapped in this mind game? Are your ideas yours or are you affected by a particular wording?

(I won the game and I had the worst ending possibile, the one in which press is a servant of people of power)