Note the reference in Miranda Devine's article to the Emirates tailstrike incident.
Is that problem something that could only be confined to an Airbus (or any other FBW) aircraft?
I mean, would not a similar too-low thrust setting have resulted from putting a TOW that was 100 tonnes light into a Boeing FMC?
On the whole the article seems reasonably well written and not as sensationalist as most tabloid and TV current affairs media might have made it.
I disagree with one of her constructs:
Jackson says the concern is the prospect that, as planes become more automated, financially strapped airlines will devalue pilot skills. Just this January, flight engineers were phased out of Qantas flight decks because their functions had been automated.
The retirement of the 747 Classic is far more to do with the economies to be obtained by operating newer, more fuel efficient, less tired and worn aircraft and absolutely nothing to do with devaluing pilot skills. And it's nothing to do with the airline being cash-strapped. A cash-strapped airline is potentially less likely to be buying new aircraft. Those two sentences should never have been put together that way. Either poor journalism, or sloppy sub-editing.