It's not a yes/no binary rule, it's a sliding scale. For this story, your comment is over towards the "ugh, not again, they didn't even bother to understand the basic responses to their criticism" side of my scale.
What it comes down to is that I don't think every story about bitcoin needs to have a bunch of facile criticism of bitcoin attached to it. Criticism specific to the story is great, as is well thought out, deeper criticism.
And just because something has been discussed more often, doesn't mean it should not be mentioned at all?