Doesn't seem that editorialized. The "roadblock" is the feedback from critics, and the Economist's subhead is "Critics argue Mark Zuckerberg’s generosity is a cover for a land-grab".
Seems fair game to me.
People who submit stories don't own the stories on HN; stories are community property. Being the first to submit a URL does not give someone special privileges to reframe the story for everyone else.
In this case, the reframing that was done was overtly dishonest, implying as it does that The Economist endorses this point of view, which it clearly does not.
Your statement that the OP was "overtly dishonest" is ridiculous, come on.