The article seems pretty fair to me, insofar as it focuses on a certain portion of the prepper phenomenon. The tone does not strike me as patronizing or judgmental. It is informative. I thought the article ended on a nice common-sense note.

There is something of a preparedness continuum and we all fall somewhere on it - from the peops who may satisfy the Ready.gov 72-hour to those of us with a month or two of supplies, with BOBs, and those who are equipped for years on their own or can be self-sustaining indefinitely.

That continuum largely conforms, in my mind, to what the prepper anticipates as the likeliest threats - with natural disasters on the lower end of prepared to armageddon subscribers on the higher end.

The latter certainly are more fascinating from a media perspective.