Gentrification refers specifically to this displacement, and it shouldn’t be hard to understand why this is considered negative. No-one likes to have to move.
It’s also an effect of how the housing market works almost anywhere, so it’s not so easy to imagine an alternative within these market economies—a challenge the article doesn’t really touch upon.
[0] https://www.vox.com/22629826/gentrification-definition-housi...
Saying two concepts are being conflated without explaining the differences sounds a bit... pedant ? And it is because from what I can read, gentrification is when richer people arrive in a place. No wonder why people conflate it with rising prices and displacement of the poor, this is just the "natural" consequence in a market economy where housing is a commodity. Sure, you can (should!) have a policy to mitigate that problem but if you don't, as is usual, it just happens.
Is it possible got some of the existing residents to be partly responsible for undesirable conditions? If so, then displacing them seems like a necessary component.
Note that I specified “some” residents, and “partly” responsible. A mechanism to cleanly identify and displace only them seems difficult to implement.
https://www.thecity.nyc/2024/01/22/affordable-housing-lotter...
? Some people think it is not a good thing to give people a preference to stay in the neighborhood they are in because this entrenches racial segregation.