It was an entirely elitist rant. It was smug too, but that's almost beside the point.
What I'm getting is this: because of the new freedom of information, and because news companies are competing with each other (in the free market) people are freely choosing to get information through sources some people don't like, and freely choosing to, as you said, not read books about the fed or finance economy, society is going down the toilet. Key words: freely choosing. In the old days, the choices weren't available, because the media was an entirely elite-run industry, and all information came through the filter of the elite. Now the realm of ideas is truly a free market, and it irks people who don't care for the free market in the first place - but it's not just them. It also irks smug people who see that their ideology is not popular even in the free market of ideas, and end up blaming stupidity and ignorance. In this sense it's easy to see how libertarians end up espousing elitist ideas, but the contradiction is still there. Those intensely arguing for a free market in the economy are bemoaning the free market of ideas.
Have you ever thought for just one moment that if people stopped watching Hannity and reading Coulter, and started reading the books you wanted them to read, maybe they'd still have the same ideologies and vote for the same people and not much would change? Of course not - your ideology is unpopular, and therefore it must be those damn pundits and distractions that make people stupid and ignorant (i.e. disagree with you). Ironically, in today's climate of the availability of information, fact-checking has become more possible and easy than ever. In fact, from a libertarian perspective (and this is my view), the new media and availability of information is one of the greatest things to ever happen to the human race. Disinformation has become a hundredfold harder to spread than ever - because while it has always been there, even when the elite controlled information, it is now possible to discredit it. If you believe in the free market, then you'd believe in the eventual triumph of obvious truths over obvious lies, because both are available to spread now and people get to freely choose which to believe. Only elitists, and some very confused smug people whose ideology is unpopular, would see something wrong with that, and fear that people are too stupid to make that distinction. Never mind that if this is true, it is true with every free market, including the economic one.