I thought the article was pretty clear in attributing the poor streaming to extreme incompetence. The poor quality is concerning not because it's part of a "two-pronged plan" but because it's indicative of Congress's poor grasp of internet technology which is particularly jarring in this context.

Additionally, just because the poor quality wasn't necessarily malicious does not exonerate the committee entirely; the tone of the article is still warranted because the end result is the same regardless of intent and because expecting a watchable stream in this day and age is more than reasonable.