I'd like to point out that TFA does not actually link to the memo itself. So any phrasing in the article like "scolds," "blunt," or "exhorts" must be taken with a grain of salt--and by extension, any comments here that are opining on the letter based on these adjectives.

In fact, I'd go as far as saying that the article in its current state is at best worthless (and at worst a hatchet job).

It's entirely possible that the tone of the letter/memo was indeed harsh, or tone-deaf, or cringe-worthy. But perhaps it wasn't, and honestly the few quotes in the article make it impossible to tell.