Is this a point in favor of EP, or against it?

This is especially relevant, imo, when it's the premise that's flawed, and not some downstream conclusion or assumption.

It feels like we can hold the discipline of EP to a slightly higher standard given how easily their worst efforts align and are appropriated by the right wing.

A vision scientist who has bad theory doesn't fuel end up in spree shooting manifestos....

As a very smart journalist, I cover the 'information war'. The last thing I want is for there to be any kind of opting-out of 'war' (a term that I, a journalist, use to self-describe my role). No side must be allowed to say "no thank you". The war must continue. Forever. It's actually a moral issue.

Because, you see, speech has a right to be heard. A listener expressing a preference of which speech they consume is actually infringing upon speakers both specifically and in general.

I am very smart. I cover 'online speech' and am a journalist.

lol, there's two crimes here. The other is not including a year. Because this is from an article in 2024.

(Though admittedly this is at least, if not moreso, a poster crime than a dataviz crime).