I think you need to seriously consider whether "tries to be journalism" means "is more in line with my opinions."
Furthermore, this was an op-ed piece. Agree with it or not, it isn't, in fact it is expicitly not, objective journalism.
I think you need to seriously consider whether "tries to be journalism" means "is more in line with my opinions."
Furthermore, this was an op-ed piece. Agree with it or not, it isn't, in fact it is expicitly not, objective journalism.
removes monocle
Oh yes. Quite.
Did you just learn what “motte and bailey” means or something?
He’s saying look at the section the piece appeared in (op-ed; opposite the editorial page; the OPINION section)
It’s the one part of the paper that is specifically meant for opinions. It has featured climate change deniers, flat earthers, and 9/11 truthers. Because it’s expected that people know what an opinion piece is and can use their own experience and wisdom to form their own opinion.
Second, it’s easy/fun to crap on Comcast, but it’s possible to be pro-net-neutrality AND pro-repeal. See: Marc Andreessen.