Perhaps you couldn't read the article because of the paywall, but it does include the following:

> Cook said 10% to 15% of Apple employees have gone back to the office and he hopes the majority of staff can return to the company’s new campus in Silicon Valley sometime next year. The CEO said he goes into the office at different points during the week and he noted that remote work is “not like being together physically.” Working in the office sparks creativity such as during impromptu meetings, he added.

Overall it's a balanced article that shows Cook both acknowledging WFH benefits and reiterating the perceived advantages of the office.

No it's not the opposite. Tim Cook made two statements to bulid a slightly nuanced thesis, and both articles presented the nuance, and some commenters are inventing a one-sided straw argument to attack.

>both articles presented the nuance

No they didn't, and that's the problem. It's not a "straw argument".

Cook, in an interview, said something that included both a pro-remote statement and a pro-office statement. The AppleInsider article included both of these statements. Bloomberg, OTOH, only included the pro-remote statement in their article.

It's lying by omission.

Exactly this! Journalist should report "from all perspectives". But today rarely we see this - just look CNN and Fox News - only a single perspective is reported on both sides! "It's lying by omission."