(1) Dismissing the work as "pop" (a) shows that you are avoiding the issue with Gallic contempt rather than confronting the fact that your emperor is naked and (b) ignores the question of whether Heidegger, Kant, Bergson, et al. wrote "pop" articles - are serious thinkers in the habit of writing clumsy "pop" pieces? The fact that you assume Sartre did this is telling.
(2) This article (the actual title is, as I checked my shelves last night, Existentialisme est un humanisme), far from being "pop", is considered Sartre's most succinct statement of his philosophical position. There is no biographer or analyst of Sartre's philosophy who has not commented on this piece in depth.
(3) Far from being a "pop" article (you make it sound as if he wrote it for Maxim) it is the text of a public lecture he gave on his philosophical position in 1946.
Heidegger gave many similar public lectures, but I don't think the one he gave entitled Was ist das - die Metaphysik? (translated in the US as "What is Metaphysics?") is considered "pop" - rather it is taken as a condensed statement of his metaphysical thinking.
Give us a break.
This article (the actual title is, as I checked my shelves last night, Existentialisme est un humanisme), far from being "pop", is considered Sartre's most succinct statement of his philosophical position. There is no biographer or analyst of Sartre's philosophy who has not commented on this piece in depth
___It is an article, not a philosophical treatise, and Sartre's philosophical position is to be found in BEING AND NOTHINGNESS. "Existentialism is a Humanism" is just a superficial summary.