Actually, they are underpaid writers who -- if this piece is any indication -- at least get it more right than the NYT[1]. If you're aware of a more thoroughly researched account of Alcor's history that is less negative than this one, I'd love to read it.

[1]: The NYT reported "the procedure itself went mostly as planned" when in reality -- quoting from Alcor's own account of the events -- the woman's head fell out of its "enclosure", there was general "confusion and disagreement" on how to perform the procedure, and then "cryoprotective perfusion was not generally successful".