Used to be, anyone who got published was worth responding to because publication was scarce and went through a huge amount of vetting.

Today, we live in a world awash with ideas, information, opinions, analysis, and raging bull-headed shock jocks. Anyone can publish just about anything.

The digital generation is growing used to swimming in a sea of information and ideas. They are getting adept at ignoring and filtering out things that don't matter to them. These kinds of skills are essential for long-term survival.

In such a world, one doesn't really need to highlight or respond to every wrong or stupid thing said.

In fact, highlighting and responding is the same as drawing attention to.

For most people, the biggest problem of any idea, good or bad, right or wrong, is simply getting noticed.

So, if you think an idea is a bad one - responding to it may be the exact thing you don't want to do. It may be better to simply ignore it.

If something is getting early traction, and it's bad, it needs to be quashed early before it becomes a virus. But most viruses never make it pass patient zero.

On the other hand, if you see something that is valuable - highlight it. This is perhaps the best thing you can do for it.