I can't speak for the original commenter, but I would definitely have similar concerns about an article called "Evangelical Christianity Is A Welter of Lies, Hypocrisy, and Eugenic Fantasies". If you're trying to impartially inform people about what's going on in a particular movement, or argumentatively convince people sympathetic to the movement that they're wrong about it, it doesn't seem like a helpful framing. (It is, of course, a great framing if your goal is to dunk on people your readers don't like.)
Comments
I can't speak for the original commenter, but I would definitely have similar concerns about an article called "Evangelical Christianity Is A Welter of Lies, Hypocrisy, and Eugenic Fantasies". If you're trying to impartially inform people about what's going on in a particular movement, or argumentatively convince people sympathetic to the movement that they're wrong about it, it doesn't seem like a helpful framing. (It is, of course, a great framing if your goal is to dunk on people your readers don't like.)
Yup, exactly.
If the organization is truly bad, then facts will speak for themselves. IMO heavy editorialization is a sign of a weak argument.