Why is The Guardian's coverage on ME/CFS so poor?

[Michelle]

In addition to comments upthread about the SMC, "people who like to imagine they're part of some sophisticated intellectual elite, but want simple narratives can't be bothered to really look into the evidence," (seriously, @Esther12, this 100%!) and it being a small "c" conservative paper of the Establishment, professional-managerial class (and always has been rather than being a "leftist" paper), there's a comment my partner shared with me from the Grauniad's comments section on another piece stating that it's basically got a business model that depends on the use of freelancers and interns to write click-bait articles in order hoover up personal data. The latest piece being there to snare enraged ME patients and smug pseudo-intellectual professionals.

 

[ScottTriGuy]

...
action t4 was led by highly prominent psychiatrists among others, who were considered above reproach. (1) it was performed clandestinely, (2) it used questionnaires designed to deceive, (3) there was propaganda devaluing the lives of sick and disabled...

I had to google 'action t4'...from wiki...

Aktion T4 (German, pronounced [akˈtsi̯oːn teː fiːɐ]) was a postwar name for mass murder through involuntary euthanasia in Nazi Germany.

Yep, sure seems like the same modus operandi.

_______

...
so i guess i am saying that if the guardian is innocent, and if thy published it, it is disturbing that this was not noticed by them. [and if they did, did they remove the part about sex offenders later?]

i think it is their responsibility as humans, let alone professioanls, to notice propaganda.

i don't think noticing something this egregious is taht specialized a skill. @dave30th is it?
...

Heck, I may have been ignorant of 'action T4', but even my first thought about the 'article' was that it was blatant propaganda. The other term that came to mind was 'product placement'.

_______

...
i keep thinking of a /far side/ cartoon where an elephant
using crutches and with a bandaged leg is on the phone. it
says something like "into a WASTEBASKET?!" maybe it is a
similarly trivial reason. basically nothing caused mayhem.
...

For your ease of reference...




-----------

...
having said all that, in the normal course of becoming a movement, we might answer the question about this newspaper by accident.

interesting facts could surface when making demands,
contacting prosecutors or attorneys general, getting public,
and making loose alliances.

1) foia
2) whistleblowers
3) sourcewatch, wikileaks
4) investigative reporting
5) testimony, depositions, amicus
6) investigations by parliaments / grand juries
7) joining strongholds of perpetrators (dunno legality, and not
suggesting it, but newspapers have done this to expose fraud)

What org is currently leading the way on #s 1 to 7?