https://gizmodo.com/the-best-bluetooth-speaker-now-works-wit...
Ugh. This story really was just written to be controversial clickbait. Utter lack of journalistic integrity.
You can write a promo putting yourself in the position of your standard demographics, you can write an opinion piece, the chances they'll coincide aren't that high.
Online sometimes I push a viewpoint to be more extreme, or take a contrary position in order to shed light on, and develop, my own belief/position. [I'm doing it now!]
Typically a journalist's job is to report without bias (to the extent possible). They might present others' viewpoints as well as factual information, but they shouldn't be presenting their own viewpoint in the guise of objective information. At least this is what I think.
For op-eds, obviously the expectations are different. But I think it's pretty shady that we have an op-ed here presenting the Echo as a terrible idea when two weeks ago the author was touting the same thing as amazing in a review. Best case it means that the author is intentionally being provocative and presenting an opinion he doesn't hold simply because it'll get views. Sensationalism is not a hallmark of quality journalism. Worst case I'm left to believe the positive review was purchased, which is even worse.
That isn't possible. Everything contains bias. The simple choice to report a particular story instead is a bias against the other stories left unreported. The duty of a journalist is to disclose their bias when it might affect the story, so people can interpret their report with the proper context.
Reporters are not mere stenographers that repeat official statements and press releases. They choose what they feel is important enough to report on and give their interpretation of the facts as well as their opinion about the facts (which should be properly labeled as op-ed).
> presenting the Echo as a terrible idea when two weeks ago the author was touting the same thing as amazing in a review.
People can change their mind about a product. Maybe the author learned about the risks from comments made on the review.
> Best case it means that the author is intentionally being provocative
You're seeing what you want to see, not the best case which is simply that the author learned more and change their recommendation. (however, it would be good to clearly state that this change in the beginning on the article)