Pinker is not really writing for everyone but, like most writers covering important topics that often contradict whatever happens to be transiently fashionable at the time, for a few who are ready to hear his message and to a greater or lesser degree to be stimulated by it. In a world in which the mass media is purely sensation-driven (“if it bleeds, it leads”) it’s evident that at least some counter-impulse may be helpful. As for disparaging people who can’t be bothered to learn the facts, I hardly see that as a strike against Pinker unless one believes that all “arguments from ignorance” are “equally valid” but then we’re arguing for a fact-free world and I don’t think the overall intent of your article is to support such a solipsistic and ultimately defeatist notion.