[themenomen]

Well, the "article" is mostly an opinion piece, it could as well be a Twitter thread. So, at least, there is some value when evaluating a personal opinion in the context of other opinions expressed publicly by the author. I'm not saying this is the case, but I don't think is invalid either.

[bart_spoon]

Of course it’s invalid. Either there is something about the substance of the article that is debatable or there isn’t. Other opinions are completely irrelevant.

[themenomen]

If I write an article about the benefits of X drug and have expressed publicly by other channels my support for the company that produces such drug, I think is relevant for the discussion of the article I just wrote. That's why I said that may be it is not the case here, as I my self don't see any relationship between the linked tweets and the article. But I don't think is to crazy to think that two related opinions can be analyzed together regardless of the channels of distribution.

[bart_spoon]

If you write an article about the benefits of X drug, you have presumably made arguments that can or can not be supported with available evidence. Your other interactions with the company producing the drug are irrelevant.

[bigbillheck]

That's not very Bayesian of you.

[bart_spoon]

You need to review your understanding of Bayesian statistics then