It's a little rap on the hands, a tease, considering they love highlighting conflicts of interest when it doesn't concern them. COI's don't have much legal bind

It's a little rap on the hands, a tease, considering they love highlighting conflicts of interest when it doesn't concern them. COI's don't have much legal binding on US news reporting, unless it comes down from courts. They're more of courtesy and an attempt to get some of that legal veneer. But it is often done to build trust with the reader and not underhandedly trying to cast yourself as impartial third party who can be trusted to give a best effort picture of the situation. Ie, vox media is currently taking steps against chatgpt potentially leading to a lawsuit, why should you trust their reporting to be fair or even thorough on the subject? It's not a question of if they are right on their lawsuit, but if they giving you reasonable service. Now I suspect your fine with that service, but I like a bit more impartiality and thoroughness and the imbalanced use of COI's smells. COI's can get very draconian in other sectors with legal binding s. It does nearly reach who you vote for. And practicing your "Opinion" doesn't give you a legal basis to breach those bounds, and say insider trade off a company.