The article states pretty explicitly that this is not unusual. Twice. That line they quoted is a direct line from the article:
Trump is still speaking in Wildwood but much of the crowd has left. It’s cold and he’s been speaking 90 minutes. This whole area was full of people when Trump started," Anderson wrote.
And again:
“You can clearly see that people are leaving while [Trump is] rambling incoherently,” Masterson wrote in another post. “This happens at a lot of rallies, cultists show up thinking he will say something new and profound. Then they get bored and walkout.”
The whole premise of the article is stated right up front. Trump claimed an audience of 100,000, but the evidence shows that audience didn’t hang around for him, undercutting the claim.
Feels like before you complain about journalism ethics you should at least commit to actually reading the articles so you know what you’re complaining about.