It's your presumption to already know the "truth" that can never lead to a discussion in good faith, not your opinion on the article itself.
But as to your point, are you asserting that none of the team’s investigators ever said anything like "China refused to give raw data on early COVID-19 cases to the WHO-led team probing the origins of the pandemic"? Where is your proof that the statement you quoted is false?
Propaganda doesn't work like you are implying it does.
It's part "bullshit asymmetry principle", but it's mostly repetition of the same talking points.
I.e. find something true but inconsequential (Dominic Dwyer said that they weren't necessarily given enough to do all of the analises that they would do), and that's then blown out of proportion:
- what are the actual facts? What was Dwyer's role? Was he working with the same people that Daszak and Fischer worked (i.e. their chinese counterparts)? Why don't we hear testimony from their side?
- one scientist became several members of their team
- one statement became just part of a narrative (repeated headlines) about Chinese negligence in sharing information
- the supposed neglicence then justified "deep concern" from the WH
That works thanks to the fact that, even if people read the articles, and realize that there's no smoking gun..
All they remember is the newspaper headline, and people will uncritically trust authorities like NYT or Reuters... So even when there's no smoking gun, them referring to each others as source is enough to make their narrative seem legitimate
But as to your point, are you asserting that none of the team’s investigators ever said anything like "China refused to give raw data on early COVID-19 cases to the WHO-led team probing the origins of the pandemic"? Where is your proof that the statement you quoted is false?