Wow, someone was really enthusiastic about landscape photography there: >Since most people have pretty bad taste, they easily mistake the cutesy postcards for good photography, especially if they are displayed as large, impeccably sharp prints. Hence the success of photographers like Alain Briot, Michael Reichmann, and Ken Rockwell. Their photography is pure Socialist Realism, only not as honest about its program -- relentlessly upbeat, eager to please, depicting the world not as it is, but as it surely should be ... and utterly devoid of power to evoke anything but the most trite and saccharine-sweet of emotions.
I must admit, though, that I do have a fondness for the postcard motifs he criticizes so harshly. I produce some of them myself for my own pleasure. And I don't think there's anything wrong with that — though one should keep it within limits (Velvia can sometimes really be too much of a good thing). However, for several years now I've mostly been shooting black and white film, because for me the interplay of light in landscapes is often the most interesting part — and that tends to get lost in color images. For me, color images have always had more of a documentary character.
By the way, the article is still worth reading (or perhaps especially because of this): it examines the context of a photograph and the possibilities of photography in a very interesting way. Photography rarely stands alone — there's always something accompanying it, even if it's just the title.