I am absolutely not arguing agains this. Here's the extract from your text I disagree with:
> I can’t think of many other skills that enable you to create something from scratch and reach as many people as knowing how to set up a simple website.
> Just last week, I was able to come up with an idea and then launch a site in 2 days. That site was then seen by about 10,000 people in a couple hours.
> Think about it: something I did reached 10,000 actual living people and had an impact (however small) on their life. That would never have been possible if I didn’t know how to code.
This text is arguing that the value of learning programming is in the software you will create and the impact it will have on a population. This would be a valid point when arguing why one should become a programmer.
Drawing on an analogy similar to the one you make: Learning to write is crucial today, even though I will probably never be a published author. Similarly, learning to code is important, but not because "you too, can make a website!".
Well, I think both point are valid. You should learn to code as you learned to write, to be able to function in a modern society.
And another good reason for learning to code (just like learning to write) is that it'll let you reach a lot of people, and possibly become extremely rich in the process. I guess that second argument is what Jeff Atwood is mostly disagreeing with.
Drawing on an analogy similar to the one you make: Learning to write is crucial today, even though I will probably never be a published author. Similarly, learning to code is important, but not because "you too, can make a website!".