I hate to say it, but fistful has a point.
At the beginning of the article the author does point out that documents found in this method have come from multiple ancient cultures and traditions, including Egyptian. Yet, at the end he makes the implication that biblical scholars are running around Willy nilly and ripping up masks and the only ones interested in the potential documents found in those masks.
While the rest of the authors points are legitimate and ones all archeologist need to consider, the parting shot at the end was a low blow. Even the grocery lists have historical importance, and IMHO, probably more than the Gospel of Mark.
I'm not saying that Fistful doesn't have a point.
I'm saying that the author of the editorial opinion has asked some very good questions, questions that should be asked, and which should be answered, but which aren't yet being answered.
What it's not is an example of media bias furthering their love of brown men of ancient times or whatever.
It's an OP/ED. Those frequently come with disclaimers about the opinions expressed in the article, such as this one...
Joel Baden is professor of Hebrew Bible at Yale University. Candida Moss is professor of New Testament and early Christianity at the University of Notre Dame. The opinions in this column belong to them.Which is to be found right above the opening lines of the OP/ED in question.
OP/EDs aren't hard news coverage. They're people editorializing about their opinions.