United News of Bangladesh

The New York Times has filed a second lawsuit against the United States Department of Defense in five months, challenging a policy that requires journalists to be accompanied by escorts while inside the Pentagon. The newspaper argues that the rule violates the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which protects freedom of the press. “The policy is an unconstitutional attempt by the Pentagon to block independent reporting on military affairs,” Times spokesperson Charlie Stadtlander said. He said the American public has the right to know how the government and military are operating using taxpayers’ money. Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell rejected the claim, saying in a post on X that the lawsuit was an attempt to gain easier access to classified information. The case marks the latest chapter in an ongoing dispute between the media and President Donald Trump’s second administration. The Times first sued the Pentagon in December after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth introduced new rules for journalists seeking access to the building. In March, US District Judge Paul L. Friedman struck down those restrictions, ruling that they violated the rights of Times reporter Julian E. Barnes and the newspaper. After the ruling, the Pentagon introduced an interim policy requiring reporters to be escorted at all times while inside the building. In April, Judge Friedman said the new policy also violated his earlier order. However, the escort rule remained in place after an appeals court temporarily suspended part of the judge’s decision while the government challenges it. The new lawsuit, filed in a federal court in Washington, directly challenges the escort requirement on constitutional grounds. The Times said the rule is part of a broader effort to limit access for journalists who are unwilling to report only what Pentagon officials approve. The newspaper called the policy “clearly unconstitutional.” In its earlier lawsuit, the Times and several other news organizations refused to accept the Pentagon’s new terms for obtaining press credentials and left their workspaces inside the building. They continue to cover the US military from outside the Pentagon, while journalists approved under the new rules now occupy the press offices. Parnell said the escort policy is lawful and narrowly designed to protect national security information from unauthorized disclosure.

The New York Times Company has signed a multiyear agreement to license its content to Amazon for AI-related uses, marking the newspaper’s first such deal in the generative AI space. Announced on May 29, the partnership comes as the Times continues its legal battle against OpenAI and Microsoft over alleged copyright infringement involving the use of its journalism to train AI systems. According to Variety, the agreement will bring The New York Times’s editorial content to various Amazon platforms, enhancing customer experiences across the tech giant’s services. According to the companies, the collaboration aims to make the Times’s original content more accessible within Amazon products, including direct links to Times offerings, and reflects a shared commitment to delivering global news and perspectives via AI. Under the deal, Amazon will license content from The New York Times, including NYT Cooking and The Athletic sports publication. This includes the real-time display of summaries and brief excerpts on Amazon products such as Alexa, and the use of content to train Amazon’s proprietary foundation AI models. Rise in harmful content on Facebook following Meta's moderation rollback New York Times CEO Meredith Kopit Levien said, “This deal is consistent with our long-held principle that high-quality journalism is worth paying for. It aligns with our deliberate approach to ensuring that our work is valued appropriately, whether through commercial deals or through the enforcement of our intellectual property rights.” The Times’s move reflects the broader, mixed response of media companies to the rise of artificial intelligence, some opting for licensing partnerships while others pursue legal action. Last month, The Washington Post, owned by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, entered a “strategic partnership” with OpenAI.

BNP Senior Joint Secretary General Ruhul Kabir Rizvi on Tuesday alleged that  the "defeated force" influenced The New York Times to publish a report by providing "false" information about Bangladesh. "The allies of fascism own thousands of crores of  illegal money. They are trying to stigmatize Bangladesh by using their illicit money," Rizvi said while talking to the media at the party's Nayapaltan central office in the city. The BNP leader claimed that extremism has not risen in Bangladesh, rather fascism has been curbed. He said people are freely practicing their religion and expressing their views. “They celebrated the Eid (festival) without fear, unlike in the past under Sheikh Hasina's rule. In the past, no one could celebrate Eid with comfort,” he said. Rizvi accused the ruling Awami League of spreading misinformation globally. Sheikh Hasina staged the so-called anti-militancy operations as a political strategy to cling to power, which was even mentioned  in the book of a former IGP, he said. Paints a troubling and one-sided view of Bangladesh, says CA's press secretary about NYT article on Islamic hard-liners “Awami League is not sitting idle, rather spending black money to tarnish the image of Bangladesh…. Awami League is doing subversive activities,” he said. Referring to the killings during the 2024 July mass uprising, the BNP leader said there is no sign of remorse in Sheikh Hasina's statements regarding the way Mugdhah Faiyazs were shot dead on her order. “Rather, Awami League leaders who have fled abroad are trying to destabilise the country,” he said. He said Awami League's allies are everwhere in the administration. He also criticised the certain advisers of the interim government saying that some advisers are conspiring against BNP. “An advisor had conspired against BNP in 2007 as well. He is doing it this time too,” he said. The BNP leader said a farmer committed suicide in Meherpur after failing to get the fair price of onion bit the advisers are silent on this issue. “Had the government broken the syndicate, farmers would have received fair prices for their products," he said. Noting that 20-25 people were killed in road accidents in the last two days, Rizvi said had the administration worked hard, many people would not have lost their lives on the roads. “It is essential to introduce a democratic system in the country. The government needs to be accountable. It is ill-intentioned that some advisers are defaming the BNP by ignoring their own works,” he said. The BNP senior joint secretary general urged the government to arrange the election by conducting necessary electoral reforms as soon as possible. Everyone must be part of resistance to extremism and terrorism: IGP “An electoral government is a legitimate government. Any delay in the election is not acceptable to common people. If the specific date of the elections is not clarified, it will create confusion,” said Rizvi. 

Justin Baldoni, director of the film "It Ends With Us," has filed a $250 million libel lawsuit against The New York Times in Los Angeles Superior Court. The suit challenges a report alleging Baldoni sexually harassed actress Blake Lively and attempted to tarnish her reputation. The lawsuit, involving Baldoni and nine co-plaintiffs, accuses the Times and Lively of orchestrating a smear campaign. Among the plaintiffs are lead producer Jamey Heath, production company Wayfarer Studios, and crisis communications specialist Melissa Nathan. Nathan’s text message was featured prominently in the Times' Dec. 21 article, titled: "‘We Can Bury Anyone’: Inside a Hollywood Smear Machine." Popular Characters of Squid Game Season 2: Who's Your Favourite? The Times, however, defended its reporting, stating that the article was thoroughly researched and relied on original documents, including emails and text messages. Danielle Rhoades, a Times spokesperson, said the article was "meticulously and responsibly reported," and no factual errors have been identified by Baldoni or his team. Baldoni’s lawsuit claims the Times adopted Lively’s version of events without verifying her allegations and ignored evidence that contradicted her narrative. It also argues that the documents reviewed by the Times would have shown Lively, not Baldoni, engaged in a smear effort. Lively, who is not named as a defendant in the lawsuit, had previously filed a legal complaint with the California Civil Rights Department over her alleged treatment during the film's production. Her attorneys asserted that the libel lawsuit does not alter the claims outlined in her complaint. "It Ends With Us," based on Colleen Hoover’s 2016 bestselling novel, premiered in August and exceeded expectations with a $50 million opening. However, its release was overshadowed by reports of tensions between Baldoni and Lively. While Baldoni was largely absent from the promotional campaign, Lively and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, actively participated, coinciding with Reynolds’ promotion of “Deadpool & Wolverine.” Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt reach divorce settlement after 8 years Lively gained recognition in the 2005 movie "The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants" and solidified her fame with the TV series "Gossip Girl." She has since appeared in films like "The Town" and "The Shallows." Baldoni, known for starring in "Jane the Virgin," directed the 2019 movie "Five Feet Apart" and authored the book "Man Enough," which critiques conventional masculinity. Following Lively’s complaint and the Times report, Baldoni’s agency, WME, dropped him as a client. He had previously addressed concerns that "It Ends With Us" romanticized domestic violence, asserting that critics were entitled to their views.

In a remarkable achievement, Bangladeshi-born American Chef Nur-E Gulshan Rahman has been shortlisted for the Best Chef in the Mid-Atlantic category by the James Beard Foundation. Chef Rahman's culinary prowess shines at Korai Kitchen, a hidden gem in Jersey City, renowned for its authentic Bangladeshi cuisine. The James Beard Foundation Awards, often dubbed the “Oscars of food,” honor excellence across America's culinary spectrum. These prestigious awards celebrate the artistry and innovation in the culinary field, recognizing the best chefs and restaurants. Despite its modest beginning, as reported by the New York Times, Korai Kitchen has carved a niche in Jersey City's vibrant culinary scene. Chef Rahman's eatery has earned accolades for its authentic Bangladeshi flavors and homestyle cooking. An emotional social media post from the restaurant celebrated this milestone: “Amma was nominated for a James Beard Award today!! Words cannot express just how proud I am of my mom and our incredible team. What a beautiful moment of recognition for Bangladeshi food and for my insanely talented mother, who has honed her craft for over FIFTY YEARS!” Read more: Kishwar wins Australians hearts with her Bangladeshi recipe on Masterchef The post added, “My mom would sometimes say she felt like an imposter because she has no formal culinary training. Amma, you've shown that it's not culinary school that makes a chef; it's passion, talent, grit, and love.” Korai Kitchen, described by the New York Times, offers an immersive experience akin to dining in a Bangladeshi home. The restaurant features a rotating buffet of dishes, including bhorta (mashes) and light curries, all prepared under the watchful eye of Chef Rahman. It's a celebration of slow food — homestyle Bangladeshi dishes crafted with care and affection. Since their inception in 1990, the James Beard Awards have set a benchmark for culinary excellence. The outstanding chef category, in particular, honors chefs who not only uphold high culinary standards but also positively influence their peers and make a significant impact on the wider community. Chef Rahman's nomination is a testament to her dedication and skill, bringing the rich flavors of Bangladesh to the American culinary landscape. Read more: AI Robot Chefs: Automated Cooking Could Redefine Food Industry

A 13-year-old boy from Oklahoma, United States, is believed to be the first person to defeat Tetris since the game's introduction more than three decades ago.In a video released on Tuesday, the Oklahoma boy, known online as Blue Scuti and by his legal name, Willis Gibson, is seen playing for around 38 minutes and reaching level 157 before stating, "Oh, I missed it," assuming that a misplaced block foiled his attempts, reports The Guardian. Video Games Releasing in January 2024: A Comprehensive Guide to New ReleasesBut he recovers, and when the blocks fall, he repeats, "Please crash," and completes another line of blocks, the Tetris method for collecting points. The game freezes, indicating de facto victory, and he shouted, "Oh my God! Yes! I’m going to pass out. I can’t feel my hands.” His score read “999999,” it said.Previously, only artificial intelligence-powered bots could push the game, initially launched on the Nintendo Entertainment System (NES), to its "kill screen," when its blocks fall so quickly that the game itself cannot continue. China approves 105 online games after draft curbs trigger massive losses“It’s never been done by a human before. It’s basically something that everyone thought was impossible until a couple of years ago,” Vince Clemente, president of the Classic Tetris World Championship, told the New York Times.The game was launched in 1989. According to the New York Times, Willis practices 20 hours a week on a cathode-ray tube television, the report said. Epic Games wins antitrust lawsuit against Google over barriers to its Android app storeWillis dedicated his victory to his father who died last month. Willis, according to 404 Media, has become one of United States' best competitive Tetris players in just two years, using a newly trendy way of manipulating the NES controller known as "rolling". He first found the game on YouTube, where he posted a video of his victory, he told the Times.

Twitter has removed the verification check mark on the main account of The New York Times, one of CEO Elon Musk's most despised news organizations. The removal comes as many of Twitter’s high-profile users are bracing for the loss of the blue check marks that helped verify their identity and distinguish them from impostors on the social media platform. Musk, who owns Twitter, set a deadline of Saturday for verified users to buy a premium Twitter subscription or lose the checks on their profiles. The Times said in a story Thursday that it would not pay Twitter for verification of its institutional accounts. Early Sunday, Musk tweeted that the Times' check mark would be removed. Later he posted disparaging remarks about the newspaper, which has aggressively reported on Twitter and on flaws with partially automated driving systems at Tesla, the electric car company, which he also runs. Also Read: Twitter now valued at less than $20bn: Elon Musk suggests Other Times accounts such as its business news and opinion pages still had either blue or gold check marks on Sunday, as did multiple reporters for the news organization. “We aren’t planning to pay the monthly fee for check mark status for our institutional Twitter accounts," the Times said in a statement Sunday. "We also will not reimburse reporters for Twitter Blue for personal accounts, except in rare instances where this status would be essential for reporting purposes," the newspaper said in a statement Sunday. The Associated Press, which has said it also will not pay for the check marks, still had them on its accounts at midday Sunday. Twitter did not answer emailed questions Sunday about the removal of The New York Times check mark. The costs of keeping the check marks ranges from $8 a month for individual web users to a starting price of $1,000 monthly to verify an organization, plus $50 monthly for each affiliate or employee account. Twitter does not verify the individual accounts to ensure they are who they say they are, as was the case with the previous blue check doled out to public figures and others during the platform’s pre-Musk administration. While the cost of Twitter Blue subscriptions might seem like nothing for Twitter’s most famous commentators, celebrity users from basketball star LeBron James to Star Trek’s William Shatner have balked at joining. Seinfeld actor Jason Alexander pledged to leave the platform if Musk takes his blue check away. The White House is also passing on enrolling in premium accounts, according to a memo sent to staff. While Twitter has granted a free gray mark for President Joe Biden and members of his Cabinet, lower-level staff won’t get Twitter Blue benefits unless they pay for it themselves. “If you see impersonations that you believe violate Twitter’s stated impersonation policies, alert Twitter using Twitter’s public impersonation portal,” said the staff memo from White House official Rob Flaherty. Alexander, the actor, said there are bigger issues in the world but without the blue mark, “anyone can allege to be me” so if he loses it, he’s gone. “Anyone appearing with it=an imposter. I tell you this while I’m still official,” he tweeted. After buying Twitter for $44 billion in October, Musk has been trying to boost the struggling platform’s revenue by pushing more people to pay for a premium subscription. But his move also reflects his assertion that the blue verification marks have become an undeserved or “corrupt” status symbol for elite personalities, news reporters and others granted verification for free by Twitter’s previous leadership. Along with shielding celebrities from impersonators, one of Twitter’s main reasons to mark profiles with a blue check mark starting about 14 years ago was to verify politicians, activists and people who suddenly find themselves in the news, as well as little-known journalists at small publications around the globe, as an extra tool to curb misinformation coming from accounts that are impersonating people. Most “legacy blue checks” are not household names and weren’t meant to be. One of Musk’s first product moves after taking over Twitter was to launch a service granting blue checks to anyone willing to pay $8 a month. But it was quickly inundated by impostor accounts, including those impersonating Nintendo, pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly and Musk’s businesses Tesla and SpaceX, so Twitter had to temporarily suspend the service days after its launch. The relaunched service costs $8 a month for web users and $11 a month for users of its iPhone or Android apps. Subscribers are supposed to see fewer ads, be able to post longer videos and have their tweets featured more prominently.