Golf Digest ran the article but that wasn't a Golf Digest editorial, it was written by John Feinstein. I've read a number of Feinstein's books, and he's an excellent writer, but he's also a huge liberal. And he starts of with saying the reason golf should do this isn't political, but then goes into a litany of left-wing political positions. An argument can definitely be made for why the PGA should move this tournament but as he goes into all his left-wing talking points on other issues he's not helping himself win people over as I see it.
By publishing it, Golf Digest was editorializing it. By publishing any (now known as) op ed piece, a publication is editorializing it.
I'm pretty sure the original grant to use the course for the event was not political in nature, but the decision to refuse to use it, has political overtones. (The decision to rescind the grant to use it has been made.)
Best for golf to separate from Trump.
Best for America to separate from Trump.
Best for humanity to separate from Trump.