Concision certainly isn't this writer's metier. And (with apologies to Kipling), a picture is only a picture, but political cant is a bore. The article would have been a bore even if Lewis had stopped at ". . . Greenberg was wrong, and Hawk overreacted, and there isn't much more to be said." Exactly. There wasn't any more to be said, but he went on and wrote a whole lot more without saying anything more.
Greenberg is reprehensible, and not merely because she abused kids to get her pictures. She's a left-wing nut who's been abusing photography for a long time. But that doesn't mean that "exploitation is photography's true métier;" it means exploitation is Greenberg's true métier.
What's interesting is how bad the photographs were. Lewis doesn't seem to grasp the fact that art has to stand on its own feet and that the process that leads to production of an art object is distinct from the art itself. Since in this case both the artist and the art are deplorable Greenberg comes off as "just an asshole." Unfortunately, as a writer, Lewis doesn't come off much better.