I think you misunderstood me?

I’m not saying the article is bad or wrong. I’m taking exception to putting kiddie gloves in headlines.

Think about the people who only read this concisely while browsing headlines. The headline is completely ambiguous and easily reinforces the person’s heels beliefs instead of laying out the important part of where it comes from.

This is before the author and content even comes into play.

Yeah, I did. The author uses political violence as the term throughout. The problem here is not what the author means but that they’re not directly addressing it in clear terms.

You had to guess/ask whether I read the article because the headline makes the source of the political violence ambiguous.

you can bet that an author pointing out a rise on the other side of the political spectrum would not go for muddy terms. This headline seen by a right wing person would just be something they would not click and assume it’s reassuring their fox news world view by a different outlet.

It’s “right-wing terrorism” not political violence as if the whole spectrum is engaged in the same shenanigans.

You’re the popcorn of the rich.

A VPN is only as much of a security improvement as the service behind it. If it gets installed in a shady way, how much trust can you put into the service?