Sure, but we can evaluate these points and pretty quickly conclude that they're mostly wrong.

Almost everything that either group raised is identifying an already-known problem (e.g. bias) with already-well-established solutions (e.g. focus on argument, not the individual); or makes a suggestion to do something that is already well-known to be a bad idea (e.g. focus on anecdote and narrative instead of argument and evidence).

That historically we did a bad job training anyone other than white men to be analytic philosophers doesn't say that the methods of analytic philosophy are broken--it just says that our system for teaching was broken.

It might also be the case that the methods of analytic philosophy are unhelpful, but not for this reason.