This article is a bit silly. Personally I agree with all but the first four tokens in the headline, but pulling out political donations as evidence of some kind of agenda is really reaching. It's a normal part of democratic participation to give money to political causes. I'd hate to have my donation history used to try and put words in my mouth and it isnt right for this person either. Let her actions with respect to "whistleblowing" stand on their own and criticize them, but don't try and read into normal donations.
> This article is more partisan than it is informative.
It’s partisanship (and that of similar attack pieces on Haugen across right-wing media) is informative.
Particularly, its informative of about how the party that has been crying about the need to legislatively constrain the centralized power of internet platforms really just wants the issue to complain about, and desperately wants to avoid the issue, its factual dimensions, and any potential solitions actually being on the legislative agenda.
