If this allegation about the intent of Graham's article is correct, then that article comes across as disingenuous and passive-aggressive, regardless of its validity with respect to haters in general.
If that's the case, PG's piece does across as an intellectual's attack on the media. A more refined brand of populism, using his platform to vaguely defend an investment. The "haters", in this case, would be those publishing unflattering truths about certain tech companies.
I've admired PG and his essays for a while, but I've started paying more attention, and thus I'm starting to realize he's somewhat thin skinned like that; this is exactly the feeling I got after reading this new one.
Similarly, he's been passive aggressively "responding" to VC criticism by subtweeting and deflecting, and never directly addressing, some of the points raised by @DHH and others.
I take everything he writes with a grain of salt now. As a result, I started to realize his essays tend to be can defensive or just contain a lot of bias, rather than being truly introspective.
