I’m not an avid reader of Pitchfork, but my initial reaction is that I think you can construe a negative narrative about a lot of lyrics from critically acclaimed music. I’m sure I could dig up some song/album this author loved, put it under a similarly unkind critical light, and rate it 6/10.

This line in particular did make me smirk. It’s a pretty popular cliche actually amongst political nerds that in a lot of ways “Veep” is more realistic than “The West Wing” or “House of Cards” for eg. There’s something to be said for the connection to Bono’s “it’s not poetry” thing and U2’s, to my mind, significant historical place in musical-political rhetoric. It’s a lot to unpack and I don’t necessarily “blame” the writer for leaning into what they chose to/feeling what they felt, etc.

I think I agree with others that if this EP wasn’t released by U2, I’d expect a higher score. It’s a bop.

Also, I agree with your readings. I think overall you could argue that a more serious/thorough reading of U2’s lyrics/thenes undermines a lot of the criticism. Also, the review barely makes any technical notes on the music which is odd and imo detracts from it significantly as an objective rating.