This starts off as what purports to be a discussion of the misuse of the expression "begging the question"...

Half way through the article, it stops being serious and gets pretty funny.

But it's worth noting that before the article goes humorous, the author gives an example of a valid modus tollens as begging the question. Which begs the question (in the wrong sense of the word) - Why don't philosophers just stop using this phrase? We clearly think that to do philosophy (or any kind of reasoning) we must employ logically valid arguments, but all logically valid arguments, in some sense, assume what they are proving. After all, the thing being proved is contained in the conjunction of the premises.

And this is not some recent discovery. The literature is full of papers discussing the messy, unclear nature of this kind of criticism.