[_dps]

Indeed this headline is editorialized against HN guidelines. The original headline is:

"To Promote Equality, California Proposes a Ban on Advanced Math Classes"

and it seems, at least upon quick inspection, to be factually accurate (although the article content itself is far from neutral).

@dang if you get a moment this headline could benefit from reverting to the source headline.

EDIT: Actually after digging another layer down in the linked sources, I'm not sure even the "proposes a ban" is factually substantiated though it's hard to tell for sure without going one layer yet deeper and scanning through a 300 page report.

[xxxxxxx12]

> although the article content itself is far from neutral

Can we admit how pernicious it is that the school system itself is manifestly captured by ideological motives and that simply criticizing that is impossible to be "neutral" by any standard people that agree with the program would define?

I guess I'm saying: how do you voice criticism in a neutral way when the program being criticized frames itself as basic human decency.

This is the same logic that lies at the center of something like the Patriot Act. Capture language and you've perniciously twisted language so as to be unimpeachable. This is Pandora's Box.

[cratermoon]

> Can we admit how pernicious it is that the school system itself is manifestly captured by ideological motives

Sure: https://www.theroot.com/we-found-the-textbooks-of-senators-w...

[_dps]

I only meant to comment on the article's neutrality with regard to evaluating the meta aspect of the headline quality. I personally think that the kinds of measures proposed here are counterproductive (I am, among other things, a mathematics educator) — but my opinion on that isn't really relevant to the question of helping keep HN submissions at the desired level of quality.