While my inclination is to agree with your critical view of social science research, I think picking at this example misses the point of the article.

The idea that 'hivemind' discussions are drowning out 'other' viewpoints has merit with respect to this forum. There are copious examples, from role-of-government discussions to technical preferences.

Indeed, there are cases where the community massively promotes dubious science that it finds agreeable.

We would be foolish to throw out this author's commentary because one of his examples is not bulletproof.