We’re discussing GP requiring that their “WFH” team live within a certain radius of the office for regular meetings. It’s my assertion that the team described is not really WFH, but rather a mislabeled form of flexible working or semi-remote work.

I do not believe that Amazon’s framing here is duplicitous, although I find their policy insufficient. I would however keep an eye out for companies offering “WFH” with expectations that are incompatible with the popular understanding of that term. Therefore I disagree with your assertion that it’s not profitable to discuss what “WFH” means.