I'm not sure it's really 'journalism', per se, as it is flowery language complaining about something with vague metaphors.
but i don't expect people on google buses, or hn, to know that, even less recognise it.
[edit: and... the entire post has been flagged off the front page (59 points, 2 hours ago, page 2). because anything critical is clearly irrelevant, as well as poorly written, and clearly not understanding what it's really like. la la la. what a pile of shit this place is at times.]
Some people here being, charitably, more focused on the tech side of the brain than other parts doesn't change that, though it can give misleading impressions.
But, there is certainly touchiness on hn when authors with, say, a "humanist" perspective critique the tech sphere.
There's a tendency to say these writers are not being sufficiently rational, that they are using incorrect terminology, and other things that seem like evasions on the part of much of the hn readership.
Another approach is to assume that the writer has a point, and to try to appreciate the piece for what insight it can provide. Or as a wise man said, "Try to be one of those on whom nothing is lost."