I agree with you, that it's not technology per se that causes the problems I brought up. I also agree that these problems need a sociological solution, not a technological one.
Technology is just there, the applications of technology and its users determine the effects.

If the value of technology depends on providing more free time,(an effect) , then the value of free time should equally be evaluated on how free time (another effect) is used
Not all activity, whether by the brain or other muscles, is useful activity.
“Producing alternate evidnece and experts' can be seen as busy work, rather than meaningful work, and busy work is often a form of avoiding more crucial heavy work. It's a kind of laziness hiding behind busy-ness. . It's the same for both physical activity and mental activity.

It's a leap of faith, IMO, to assume that everything that is not lazy-do-nothingness warrants an automatic seal of approval, Sequencing backward, free time in itself does not warrant an automatic seal of approval for technology.

We do need to consider ALL the effects, without making a priori judgments.
Sociologically, we do need to consider how technology is used.
Being aware of misuse is a good tool for avoiding pitfalls and intellectual laziness.

We live in an age where — even with all of our technology and despite the best documentary evidence we can produce with all of our science and cameras &tc. — it is harder than ever to definitively prove something factually happened because the other side can dispute the evidence and produce their own evidence and experts to back them up.

That is a great challenge. But it is not a technological challenge, it is a social challenge. And, yes, it is a consequence and byproduct of our technology, but still, in the way I read that article, Carr was hinting (again, he didn't come out and directly say it) that our brains are getting lazy, less used, more dependent on the machines doing things for us — as if because we have machines as a result we do less. I dispute that.

My answer back is that, yes, machines do a lot for us. But that frees us up to do lots of other stuff. The stuff we are doing (like coming up with our own sets of experts) may not be what I want us to do, but it is NOT lazy-do-nothingness!

While you can argue for that being better than censorshp or an arbitary grading system, as I do, it also comes with great risk. The undiscerning are vulnerable to being confused, misinformed and misled. They have access to information that will reinforce their misconceptions.
Additionally, It's much harder to unlearn something false that to learn something true in the first place.
While exercising brain muscles, some will just reinforce certain areas of the brain without expanding overall brain muslce strength and breadth.

Blogs and e-mail are perfect examples. Technology makes it ever so easy to spread rumors as truth and conspiracy theories as fact. An effort to correct misconceptions is liable to result tin parallel arguments with no final resolution.
Truth and lies exist on the same plane.

.I'm not sure I can feel reassured at this point.