I took a look at this article (https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/03/opinion/sunday/in-praise-of-art-forgeries.html) and I sorted out some facts and opinions.
Fact:
”In the last decade, reported revenues from the Chinese auction market have expanded ninefold, now higher than those of its American counterpart.” this is a fact because the writer KNOWS this.
”IN Queens, a guy working in his garage churned out “Pollocks” and “Rothkos” that fooled the experts, sold for millions of dollars and helped destroy the Knoedler & Company gallery, as we learned in recent months.” this is a fact because this really happened.
Opinion:
“We may also want to bless forgers for helping to tame our absurd art market. If speculators eventually are scared off by the danger of being stuck with fakes, prices may fall,” this is an opinion because it is why the writer THINKS about forgers.
“Our current market, geared toward the ultra-wealthy” this is an opinion because it’s what the writer thinks about the market.
which one was hardest to identify? I think the quote “Our current market, geared toward the ultra-wealthy” was most difficult to identify. This quote is pretty much true, or factual but it isn’t completely true, making it an opinion.
In conclusion the ratio of facts and opinions is pretty balanced which says to me that the article isn’t all speculation or opinion. It could even make the article taken more seriously because of the numerous facts.