The article's okay... remember, it's targeted at the casual Washington Post reader (one that will make it to section F, at any rate), not a technophile, and it does a reasonable job for that audience in that:
- It uses mainstream lit phrases like Stephen King, Freakonomics and Harry Potter;
- It compares the reader to the iPod;
- He points out that e-books are looked down upon by the industry (but without bashing them);
- He mentions that publishers say they want in (though not why they've been so slow at it);
- He suggests e-books are good for space-saving, if not budget-saving; and
- He doesn't scare anyone away with phrases like "incompatible," "DRM," and "operating system."
Points off, IMO, for actually saying "dead-tree". That'll only piss shelf-stuffed book-lovers off and polarize the audience. Other than that, nice and harmless.