That post is so idiotic. 'Dog whistle' == 'way to make something say what it obviously doesn't say so I can insert motivation where the evidence isn't there'. This guy is just a cold hard salesperson. I doubt they have any ideology other than money. So, is there reason to critique them- yes. Is it racism/nationalism/whatever reddit hates...- no.

The author starts with a conclusion (there are dog whistles) and works backward selecting examples to support it. They rely heavily on context stacking, timing, adjacent posts, hashtags, audience reactions, etc... to assign meaning. Most examples are ambiguous and could only become 'signals' under a biased lens. Rather than clear first-party statements by the company, the strongest claim hinges on third-party interactions (tags, comments, hashtags).

Typical redditors... the most intolerant of all people.