Random thoughts while reading the article:
* Ah yes, W.B. Yeats' dig at those mean communists.
* Nobody uses 'Moslem' anymore. Speaking of retrograde attitudes...
And while interesting the broadness of its premise (SF currently is exhausted) is largely restricted to a single short story anthology, however influential it may be. But then I frankly don't read enough SF, or enough current SF, to have that fair a sense of the market. It's certainly true that fantasy has a bigger slice of the market an - as observed - it's got its foot in the Nebula door, these days.
Frankly I was shock by the article. I always thought that short form SF/Fantasy was proof that SF was vibrant and innovative. I've read all the Hugo and most of the Nebula nominated shorts and yes there are few that I've asked "WTF is this doing here?" but for the most part the stories have been excellent and the winner is usually the best of the best. That being said the article writer is confusing the yearly best with GREAT. I don't think any one person or group can point to a work and say "this is Great". That's a consensus made in time.
1. SF/F that is more culturally diverse with more new foreign writers is the best most welcomed trend EVER.
2. SF/F is becoming to insular at the same time. Just because some one famous like Paul Cornell or Neil Gaiman or Cory Doctorow wrote something, It doesn't mean it's good. Mike Resnick must be personally banned from all SF awards because he writes the same sad depressing story.