I posted a comment there that's not yet been approved, and I also posted on my personal blog.
Basically, the article suggests that people are abusing the saturation tools and making photos that do not "accurately" show the world in which we live.
My counter-argument is that if we can adjust something like the white balance to reflect our memory of a scene or how our eyes/brain work together to "see" the scene, then there's nothing wrong with adding a little saturation if doing so more closely matches what our eyes/brain told us the scene looked like.
After all, if what the sensor records is "accurate," we shouldn't adjust white balance. Or contrast. Or we shouldn't remove annoying artifacts. Or convert to black and white.
If "what's really out there" is what's accurate, then we shouldn't ever use filters or polarizers or the like. And we should NEVER convert to black and white, of course, since the world is colored.
What ar your thoughts?
For the record, his second image IS over-saturated. I don't post-process my pictures like that nor do I care for pictures processed that way. I don't think the majority of photographers produce work like that, either.