The article posits Yang is being treated “like a bottom-tier candidate” despite “polling in the top 6.” I believe there is NO SUCH THING as a “Top 6 List” except in the mind of the #6 candidate or his supporters. There ARE percentages…of voters' first choice, second choice, name recognition, etc. Axios does not report these figures, which show Yang as first choice of 2%–3%, one Democrat out of 33. Or one out of 50; these numbers are barely distinguishable from clear bottom-tier status. This article doesn't say what standards would justify Yang getting more coverage. This is in stark contrast to a 538.Com article that lays out ITS assessments, concluding, “Yang remains a long shot…[b]ut we can no longer say with confidence that he is any more of a long shot than several other candidates.” Mostly, a weak, empty piece. Yang has some interesting ideas, but Axios doesn't make the case that they justify more media coverage.

Discusses media consternation with covering candidates who "stump" differently than others. Not really in depth, but just a quick blurb...

This is a pretty surface level piece, just barely touching on the topic at hand. I'm always happy to see media outlets questioning the coverage decisions of other media outlets, but this article does very little to educate readers or even establish that there is a media "cold shoulder" for Yang. Personally, I believe the authors are correct that Yang and Gabbard are being under-covered, but this article doesn't provide enough evidence to support the claim.