It's a valid editorial analysis. You would do yourself a favor to actually take on French point by point instead of illogically dismissing the essay as "fake news." There's quite a bit of low hanging fruit that could easily be refuted with sound logic.
If it's pro-Donaldus Minimus, it's legitimate news. If it's not pro-Donaldus Minimus,
to even a single degree, it's fake news.
In other words, business as usual, simply from the Republican side of the ledger. I
don't remember Democrats using the term specifically, but during the regime of
His Excellency Al-Hashish Field Marshmallow Dr. Barack Obama Dada, COD, RIP,
LSMFT, Would-Have-Been Life President of the Republic Formerly Known as the
United States, if stories or essays were pro-His Excellency they were legitimate news
and if they were not pro-His Excellency they, too, were fake news. It was likewise
on the Republican side during the reign of President Lips II, too.
Already, too, one hears and sees the epithet of Trump Derangement Syndrome
aimed at anyone demurring even a single degree from Donaldus Minimus no matter
how lacking in true derangement a particular observer might be and might express
himself. As we heard and saw Obama Derangement Syndrome aimed at his critics
no matter how un-deranged; as we heard and saw Bush Derangement Syndrome
aimed at his critics. (Even---especially?---on the conservative side.)
And the beat goes on . . .