[52-6F-62]

That's not the function of an opinion column, though.

He had the freedom to go as far as he wanted for the column of course, but it's not a requirement.

The column does carry a disclaimer that he is a member of the editorial board, but being an opinion column does mean he's not speaking for the paper, but himself. Of course any halfway-intelligent person can extrapolate and understand that his opinions will help form the editorial direction of the paper but is not representing the paper directly in this column. It wasn't a deep-dive.

I'm speaking to the function of the newspaper and opinion columns here, not about whether the article was good enough or not.

[cosmotic]

Regardless of how prominent it is to some, I suspect being "an opinion piece" will escape or be meaningless to at least a majority of readers. Who's fault is it then? The educated, professional author that should know their audience or the common reader doing a drive by scan of the article?

[52-6F-62]

Fair point. That’s probably an endless discussion subject. I could see many arguments for either.

I suppose it depends on what the intent was.

If it’s just to illuminate the subject, then the ball is entirely in the readers court. It certainly wasn’t hard to apply his reasoning to the NYT for anyone who was paying attention.

I’m sure there are plenty of sound arguments for the opposite, too, but that discussion is outside of the point I was trying to make.

Hope I wasn’t confusing. I have a tendency to ramble.