I dunno, are the congregants at the Extraordinary Form "fans" or "addicts"?

For a secular newspaper newspixels the Los Angeles Times gets quite a lot right here.

Failure to use correct terminology, even if it needs explanation for the non-Catholic, hurts the usefulness of the piece as a presentation of the conflict overall:

the ideas that the Mass is primarily a repetition [sic]of Christ’s death on the cross.

Or

the Mass is primarily the action of the priest rather than of the congregation

which would have cleared up the traditional interpretation more fully if the words "in his role representing Christ," were inserted after "priest."
And of course this:

Francis, although he embraces some aspects of pre-Vatican II Catholicism (such as veneration of the Virgin Mary),

is simply absurd.

If anything, the piece gives the edge to traditionalist sympathies, it's edifying not to see their preferences presented as merely aesthetics, or as some kind of anti-intellectual retro-fascism, nostalgia for simpler and stupider times.