That article is horrible. It's like back office gossip with all the names replaced with "sources". That it was written on anything more than toilet paper or someone's personal journal is amazing to me. As lurid gossip, it kept my attention. But it wasn't very illuminating.

There's no substantiation for pretty much anything. The whole article is incredibly vague. It's difficult to tell which employees were laid off and which left voluntarily. The employees leaving voluntarily could have left for any number of reasons. But she lumped them all together when she claimed that there's an atmosphere of being with an abusive boyfriend, which was claimed by one anonymous source.

If the atmosphere was really that bad, it should have been possible to find ex-employees who were claiming the same thing but were now in better jobs. If she had been able to show that, it would have been a more credible article.

The number of visitors by month at the end of the article didn't really say much. It was all just written in a way that implied negativity, even when the numbers were trending positive.