> Totally fair on the implying bias strictly on the journalist (which may or may not be there).

But it's not.

You were correct to call out their bias and tactics, as journalists have written hit pieces on various companies in the past and have earned scrutiny over how they present data.

I don't feel like you should need to backpedal on your astute observation just because someone points out a bs excuse scenario like they might have kids to pick up from school.

It is literally a journalist's job to gather and present accurate data, hopefully without bias. I don't think it is too much to ask of them, no matter the circumstances.

You went from a providing an astute observation in the first comment to providing vague platitutes about leaders (waves hands) in the next one. Way to go.

The deadlines of those poor journalists—and their kids!—is hardly the main problem with the Media. But you probably already know that.

The content of my comments is highly context-dependent. The poster who replied that it may not be the journalist's bias which led to the formulation, was right. It may or may not be due to bias. I'm willing to cede that I do not know this journalist personally, to be able to confidently say it was due to bias. I would personally bet that there's some degree of anti-Amazon/anti-big tech bias somewhere in the chain that led to the production of this article, but it's something that's hard to know for sure. I can only observe broad trends that usually show these types of formulations always leaning in one direction. This broad 'bias' is a major reason the media has lost so much trust.

Formulation: MAX(Group A) > MIN(Group B) . I often notice that some types of groups/entities always find themselves having the MIN function applied to their case, and others always have the MAX function applied to theirs.

You are also right that deadlines/school pickups aren't the main problem with media. I don't believe that to be true, I was just using that as an example because the poster I was replying to did. When we think about what a better version of the media could look like, those shouldn't be excuses.

You're right in pointing this out. If it's not obvious that there is bias involved in the article, then criticism of it should include the other option of the journalist simply being incompetenct.