While I appreciate the point of view of the article, I think it misses two points:

First, there's a great ecosystem of what I call "cargo cult" developers and adminstrators which I will sum up as "I can haz teh codez plz". If you're one of them, best wishes as you work down the list of google hits for your query. If you're not one of them, surely you're aware they exist, and you will apply caveat emptor (and of course, search results are free and you often get what you pay for) to your top search result returns.

Secondly, a tangent to "you get what you pay for". What is the alternative to free search? Probably finding a consultant out there who understands the specific issue, arranging a maintenance contract or adhoc service call, or that you spend time and money over years getting them to understand your domain in detail. Or, developing the skills in question yourself or in your organization. Getting to this endpoint is expensive in both time and money. I assert that it can be cost effective (in both time and money) to attempt to synthesize the results of internet search on related topics, and go down a few rabbit-trails and dead ends in pursuit of the true solution.

Finally, I'll mention that the only cookbook-solutions from the internet I forward to our networking team is MS KB articles, which usually are pertinent to the issue if they return from a search. I must say I find it highly ironic that putting an obscure SQL Server error message verbatim in Google gets pertinent MS KB articles with much greater accuracy than Bing.