This is absolutely awful reporting. They didn't "break into the document" and change the links, they just posted a version with links to their trojaned version

This is absolutely awful reporting. They didn't "break into the document" and change the links, they just posted a version with links to their trojaned version, and got it going around on social networks competing with the original. The "updated" bit about the "rest of Anon's leadership" is similarly wrong, although it seems they're just repeating Gizmodo's nonsense in that case. Anonymous as a whole has no "leadership" to speak of, it has no "top brass", it just has some members who are more vocal and well-known than others.