Is it possible that person opposes the practice but is a minority opinion on the board? They might be restricted from talking ill of the paper and are using other examples to make thier point.
I just brought it up because everyone else is jumping to the conclusion that the person is a hypocrite, which it seems we would also need more information to know.
It's a good point, and also in keeping with the intended spirit of this site - for example "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."