Quality of the writing and thought also reveals the construction method.

The real disappointment is none of the sources are linked in the text. Instead, it's just random underlined words, the classic chatgpt over formatting with lots of extra underlining and bolding. I appreciate that a 10-15 minute long article summarizes a 25 minute video, but it's hard to hide the real author.

Quite lazily done and just not pleasant to read.

Would it be as ironic if one wrote an article about Google and used Google search to research their sources?

If the article were about Google ruining everything, yes.

No because google can both ruin things and be a tool that is helpful in certain circumstances