Why is the world's most prestigious opinion section mimicking a subpar right-wing college newspaper?
At an absolute minimum – with an emphasis on those two words – this piece should have more fully and accurately reflected Adam S. Hoffman's affiliations. As Jamison suggests, "is a senior at Princeton" elides everything important about Hoffman's background.
Providing a sufficiently useful accounting of a guest author's affiliation(s) and other key background info, so a reader can understand where they're "coming from" and more competently assess their arguments and facts, should be a standard expectation for any publication. In any realm, general interest or specialized. And regardless of whether that guest author has submitted an opinion piece or something more concrete, such as a discussion of technical alternatives.
Why should this be even slightly controversial?
Great piece, Jamison!
If we're looking for a larger inciting factor for conservatives becoming less milquetoast since 2014 and bigger firebrands, surely the arrival of Trump on the scene, and their wholesale embrace of him is more likely than the arrival of Gen Z on college campuses. It's surely more probably that the never Trump Republicans of 2015, like Sens Graham, Cruz, and Vance who have now fully embraced Trumpism and Trumpist behavior were far more influenced by him and their voters than whatever liberal college kids were saying.
This aptly illustrates exactly what the corporate for-profit media has become; fat, lazy, and only interested in creating controversy by giving voice to deceptive radicals like this "guest essayist". At this point, the NYT has the same credibility as faux neuds.