Since the twitter migration, mainstream media has had a pretty bad bias against the fediverse. I wouldn’t listen to anything from the media about any fediverse platform because they’re either driving at a preconceived critique (usually it’s too hard or unstable), or, don’t understand it … and I’m the sort of person that is very willing to critique the removed of the fediverse.

As to why there’s such a bias … probably a confluence of a few factors:

• Mainstream media doesn’t support actual journalism. So any article is probably written by someone on a tight deadline without enough time to actually understand the fediverse or even the will to do so.
• Mainstream media has had a cozy relationship with big-social, especially twitter (and facebook?), and generally feel like mass engagement based platforms are necessary for their business … and so the fediverse is, on some level, basically a threat to their livelihood.
• Going further … any form of media that is essentially non-profit and self-organised or hosted is probably a threat to mass media’s perceived livelihood, so even on an ideological basis, the core of the fediverse is something between dangerous, value-less or dumb. Therefore, any friction or tradeoff is almost immediately fatal to them.