Your comment reminds me of my arguments with a friend who is a priest: we pick apart each other's arguments until someone mentions that we've missed the point.
Ignore the author's word-choice and try to imagine how you would frame his thoughts should you be compelled to agree with him. From the article, I infer a message from someone who laments the failure of what some schools of thought predicted when the internet was publicly realized: a sort of information revolution (but much broader) in which everyone would become well-rounded, informed and activist-minded. Corrupt politicians would be outed. Corporate greed and injustice would be exposed and ended in a fit of public outrage.
Instead, the minority sociologists were right: the internet expansion represents the same shit in a different pile. We use our access to a wealth of information to retrieve ideas that conform to our preconceived notions; magnified confirmation bias on a massive scale. We have the attention span of rabbits. And these bunnies want to do nothing but circle-jerk on TwitterFace/Reddit/whatever.
Sure, GoDaddy sucks. So does SOPA. And you might frame this revolt in a way that makes this a victory; the power of the people in the age of ubiquitous information. But it might be that we never entered the fight in the first place. Ask yourself, "Who's in power?" Ask yourself, "Why are they still in power?" Ask yourself, "Are we really affecting change?" Those are simple questions that marginalize complicated issues, but I think all the plausible answers are somewhat depressing.
SOPA will pass. Either next month or next year or next decade. The people who will make it happen have never heard of Reddit. They have someone else checking their email and planning their schedules. And they will simply adapt to the fact that large numbers of people are able to click a mouse or type 160-characters messages.