What are Tim Cook's credentials here? Did he say anything that hasn't been said by others? Is his take novel or particularly developed? This is an incredibly complex issue. As a left-leaning person who wants to see discrimination eradicated, but as a person who also wants to see it eradicated without it being the purview of some constellation of legal obligations, I recognize deep rooted conflicts. Take for example t…
If you don't want Tim Cook to say the words, just read them aloud to yourself and pretend they are your words. Then analyze their substance based on the content, rather than who says them. The counter to an appeal to authority is not to ask for a different authority. (It is to become an authority yourself.)
The Washington Post is making an appeal from authority based on the headline alone. The WP readership is going to understand that as "Person I look up to says something I might agree with". No one can pretend that away.
Then, the argument itself isn't anything particularly deep - and of course it isn't. Cook doesn't have the credentials to add anything meaningful to the discussion.