We have positive associations with most of the things the article talks about, so we're likely to underestimate the effect of the article's negative priming and framing on a typical reader

I think hostile media bias is stronger. Priors indicate that the average person on LW while have a more negative view of the article than warranted.

The article wants readers to think that Vassar has delusions of grandeur

I don't think the average person watching Vassar's Tedx talk would get the same impression as someone reading that article.

Thiel is a fascist

If that's what he wanted to do he would have made a point about what Palantir Technologies does. Maybe remind the readers about Palantir Technologies responsiblity for the attempt to smear Glenn Greenwald and destroy his career.

Instead the author just points out that Palantir is a nerdy name that comes from Lord of the Rings. Even if the author hasn't heard of the episode with Glenn Greenwald, leaving out that Palantir is a defensive contractor that builds software for the NSA is a conscious choice that someone who wanted to portray Thiel as a facist wouldn't make. The author went for "bunch of strange nerds" instead of "facists".

And there's totally such a thing as bad press, especially when your main goal is to sway computer science types

I don't think that's the audience that Harper's magazine has. That's not for whom a journalist in that magazine writes.

Did you had any negative water cooler discussions with people because of that article?