Hard not to see it that way. DC writers have a trend now of having the dividing line between Good and Evil (capital G and E) as definite, morally diametric, with no middle ground. This is most clear in JSA, which hits us on the head about what it means to be a hero in the DCU. Many, many times.
Look at how they have treated their killing heroes - Cass, Todd, etc. They are constantly flip-flopping, treated mostly terribly, and with the caveat that they are weaker heroes because they have killed. Wondy is sort of exempted, though not really.
Frankly, their editorial seems to be pushing for moral absolutism in heroes. Of course being a hero means having a particularly strong sense of Good and Evil. But the judgment that writers are wreaking on tertiary heroes seems particularly rabid and blunt. No nuance.