Transparent. Radley's piece is more transparent. The NYTimes, a warmongering, deceitful, fallen-from-grace publication, is more opaque. But they are equally biased.
And in any case, the HN guidelines make no distinction between "biased" and "objective" sources. In this case, neither is the "original source," so both are equally valid. Thus, it's sensible to chose the less reckless one, and that is clearly Radley.
And in any case, the HN guidelines make no distinction between "biased" and "objective" sources. In this case, neither is the "original source," so both are equally valid. Thus, it's sensible to chose the less reckless one, and that is clearly Radley.