"... we now have a whole generation of digital idealists who believe that information should be free, that it’s liberating, and that computers are emancipating our intellects, unbottling our creativity."
Does this mean that information should not be free and that it is not liberating? (Actually, to some extent, it can be constraining: If I learn that Nepal is in Asia, I am no longer free to think it is in South America.) And it isn't computers that people say are "emancipating our intellects, unbottling our creativity." It's the access to the aforementioned information, which enables me to cross-check your vaunted expertise. This is the same line of argument church authorities advanced against printing the Bible.
Of course, what can you expect from someone who describes Gorman's critique as "nuanced?"