So I read Patrick's article and now I'm back. You're wrong.

Both articles are saying that Robinhood makes much more money from order flow than other brokerages. The WSJ is saying that this is because Robinhood takes the market makers' price improvements to itself instead of passing it on to their clients. Patrick is saying that Robinhood makes more money off of order flow because options trading (which Robinhood does a lot of) is much more profitable for the market makers. Now both hypotheses might be true. Robinhood could be offering their clients worse prices and at the same time get paid more by the market makers because of lots of options trading. I don't see anything in Patrick's article that contradicts the WSJ's explanation.

And given the following quote, I think the WSJ's analysis is pretty convincing:

One executive with a high-speed trading firm that executes orders for Robinhood said its price improvement is much worse than that of competing brokers.