I agree to the extent that the article argues that a higher quality product deserves a higher value. I think the article is actually quite sympathetic to journ

I agree to the extent that the article argues that a higher quality product deserves a higher value. I think the article is actually quite sympathetic to journalists One of the reasons I said the article was confused is that it's not clear who the target audience is. If it was sympathetic to journalists, then why the accusatory title and overall tone?