I think the title overstates it, even per it's own arguments in the article itself whose criticism is more narrow in scope. (Though criticisms on high prices do

I think the title overstates it, even per it's own arguments in the article itself whose criticism is more narrow in scope. (Though criticisms on high prices do apply across the board) What it really takes issue with are programs that amount to a professional certificate, essentially a sort of trade school for a particular industry or role within that industry. I don't think the same criticism of quality applies to more traditional academically-oriented programs. For example an undergrad Biology major is essentially getting a wide survey of the field. At the master's level it goes into a lot more depth and you usually have some fairly specific area of focus. In short, you're acquiring a base of knowledge rather than focussing mostly on the application of that knowledge. Far different than, say, a 9-month Master's degree in cloud infrastructure that may be obsolete before you pay off the loan.