Unless I am to read this fragment to mean "gratifying one's superficial fetish for frivolous novelty", why wouldn't this article satisfy this criterion in a general sense? Feser offers an analysis of what he takes to be the moral hazards of the material prosperity, etc of capitalism. If that can't be said to be a topic of interest, then I'm sorry, but IMO, that's an indictment of the accuser, not the article.
I read articles on HN every day that are far less substantive or original than this blog post. Plenty of posts are off-topic if we go by the description above. And articles on the subject of capitalism have been featured on the front page just these last two days which is why I thought this article's publication was especially opportune.
I don't wish to make accusations, but it's difficult not to suspect prejudice.