You make it sound like the whole article is a bait and switch. I went to see, and it was two sentences about Brave, right after mentioning Chrome and ad blockers. Then it goes back to Apple. They also mentioned Mozilla towards the end.
Do you think Mozilla, Chrome, and ad blockers were also part of this marketing effort, or is it possible that all this was just normal context?
Brave’s zero market share would suggest to me that if it should be mentioned, it would be more of a side note. For years when dealing with Linux and free software the argument given by these type of publications was that they’re not worth mentioning or considering, because they had no market share. When did Brave (AdBuddy) become the defender of users rights and online safety? And why would a browser with no users be mentioned in every article you read lately about browsers? How can it have such an impact on editors still not on users?
A new browser, a notable founder, a modern technology, a new ad model in an increasingly privacy-focused world. Seems clear why that would capture attention. Whether individually you like it or not.
Do you think Mozilla, Chrome, and ad blockers were also part of this marketing effort, or is it possible that all this was just normal context?