I see your point. The article is meant to engage a broad audience, so it's targeted at creating cognitive ease through telling stories. It's possible it went a little overboard, and we'll keep that in mind for the future.

On a tangent, I'm pretty familiar with agitprop, I research Soviet agitprop as one of my primary scholarly activities. Believe me, actual agitprop is quite quite different from what we're doing. However, again, your point is well taken for future reference.