> "One of the magazines we studied, Glamour seems to recognise the value of advertising with 6.3% coming from tech companies. In this regard the publisher is somewhat ahead of the trend."
(Side point: Jumping on a "problem" you found in the first paragraph, and ask a question answered a few paragraphs further in, looks rather like you're interested in confirming your bias that this article must be wrong. That isn't a good way to learn about how the world works - If you're only reading HN to feel good, no problem, but I come here to learn stuff.)
> "One of the magazines we studied, Glamour seems to recognise the value of advertising with 6.3% coming from tech companies. In this regard the publisher is somewhat ahead of the trend."
(Side point: Jumping on a "problem" you found in the first paragraph, and ask a question answered a few paragraphs further in, looks rather like you're interested in confirming your bias that this article must be wrong. That isn't a good way to learn about how the world works - If you're only reading HN to feel good, no problem, but I come here to learn stuff.)