Of course not, but no one is saying that we should always uncritically accept what a company says. That's just boring black/white nonsense. Obviously people in

Of course not, but no one is saying that we should always uncritically accept what a company says. That's just boring black/white nonsense. Obviously people involved in a topic have a conflict of interest and their edits should be viewed with the appropriate amount of trepidation (if they should even be editing at all). This, however, has nothing to do with capitalism. It's a very odd swipe to include. And it really does depend on the specifics of what they wanted to change. People with a conflict of interest try to make poor edits all the time, but there's also tons of uncited or poorly cited stuff on Wikipedia that can be hard to change if one particularly difficult editor stands in the way for whatever reason (possibly due to their own opposing conflict of interest). A whole-sale dismissal of their complaint without any information about the specifics at all is just flat-out wrong. This is exactly the sort of behaviour are complain about.