Nice application of that pun. Bonus points for that!
It seems that some are seeing the word "structural" and haven't fully understood that anything designed into that space between the front and rear wheels will be "structural" on any car.
In a world awash in buzzwords the subtlety of Tesla's method of making the 4680 part of the structure
in order to reduce mass while adding strength, improving handling, and getting more range can easily enough be glossed over.
Use of the term "structural" isn't the magic part. Just as VW saying they are the first "high-volume" auto maker to offer over the air updates isn't magic. (particularly if they were to only count the number of BEVs eligible for their updates and compare that count to those Tesla can provide OTA updates to. Tell me then who is "high-volume")
I digress. Getting caught up with any such published terminology while not grasping the numbers that relate the significance of the effect on any given model is what makes it so easy to read the buzzwords and think that it appears to be the same. While this isn't a lie, it isn't the truth either.
So, for those coming up to speed,
of course the metal parts holding the Mach-E batteries is a "structural" component.
The thing to look for is whether Ford has made the batteries themselves part of the structure in order to glean measurable benefits, so as to reduce weight, improve strength (torsional, tensile, etc.), and whether doing so has contributed to greater range, reduced polar moment, and other factors that improve the driving experience and overall safety for the occupants of the vehicle, as the technology will soon do on the Model Y.