Slipping coverage of Iraqi elections at the NYT

A New York Times article on the Iraqi elections yesterday reported a "party atmosphere" in Baghdad and had this paragraph at the top of the story:

But if the insurgents wanted to stop people in Baghdad from voting, they failed. If they wanted to cause chaos, they failed. The voters were completely defiant, and there was a feeling that the people of Baghdad, showing a new, positive attitude, had turned a corner.

During the day yesterday this paragraph slipped lower and lower in the on-line article.  When the hard-copy came out today, the paragraph was gone entirely and the new headline for the article is "Bomb Kills 35."

Scrappleface has an article today with the headline "Iraqi Voting Disrupts News Reports of Bombings."  Some mainstream media had to take a short break from reporting bombings and showing bodies to show lines of millions of Iraqis exercising their right to vote.  The Scrappleface article was supposed to be a joke, but the New York Times made it not funny by making it not a joke.

Here is a sampling (with commentary) of mainstream newspaper headlines yesterday:

NYTimes.com headline: "Iraqi Voters Turn Out in High Numbers Despite Rebel Attacks Killing Up to 36"
Guardian headline: "Iraqis vote as attacks kill 22"
Chicago Tribune: "Update: Iraqi voters defy attacks"
Washington Post: "Iraqi Turnout Appears Strong as Voting Day Ends"
MSNBC: "Voting amid violence"
FoxNews: "Turnout High on Violent Day"
BBC: "Iraq votes as attacks hit Baghdad"

Today, the New York Times headline indicates the main news was not the 70%+ turnout in the face of violence but the bomb that killed 35.

UPDATE:  Here is the progression of changes in headline for the NYTimes article:

TIME       HEADLINE
09:24      High Turnout in Baghdad Points to Early Success
10:24      Amid Attacks, a Party Atmosphere on Baghdad's Closed Streets
18:26      Insurgent Attacks in Baghdad and Elsewhere Kill at Least 24
20:50      Attacks in Baghdad and Elsewhere Reportedly Kill Several Dozen

For an alternate point of view, you can read Kevin Drum, who explains that web headlines can change over time (and refers to those who pointed out this particular change as "wingnuts").  Although the original point wasn't about change in itself but what the headline changed to, his commentary is representative of those who see no problem here.