This reads like an early first draft of... something. I won't call it a hit piece in full. It bears the label of "opinion"; that there are potentially disagreeable statements contained therein is thus not hidden from the reader. It attempts to characterize some of the history, but its treatment of that feels disjointed. I have to draw on quite a bit of info I vaguely remember from other sources, without any sort of citations, links, or sources given.
It could be an interesting smack in the face, but it presently lacks any sort of depth or polish that would make me want to take notice.
This reads like an early first draft of... something. I won't call it a hit piece in full. It bears the label of "opinion"; that there are potentially disagreeable statements contained therein is thus not hidden from the reader. It attempts to characterize some of the history, but its treatment of that feels disjointed. I have to draw on quite a bit of info I vaguely remember from other sources, without any sort of citations, links, or sources given.
It could be an interesting smack in the face, but it presently lacks any sort of depth or polish that would make me want to take notice.
Still, it is nice first try.