Which is never a fair criticism, because even when it's true it's like that story Brian Eno tells about the first Velvet Underground album selling very few copies, but everyone who bought one starting a band. It's a credit to what came first, but not a fault in what came after. But they're right that you can see Bill Hicks in a lot of comedy that came after him, and I think that alone justifies calling him a good comedian despite not being a good entertainer.
Don't make me trot out Yngwie Malmstein again. If you're a writer, Stranger than Fiction is a masterpiece. If you're just a schlub in the audience, it's that movie that Will Farrell is in and is somehow totally not funny but dating an exceptionally bitchy Maggie Gyllenhaal for some reason. The argument of articles like this is not "some people like Stranger than Fiction, some people don't" it's that "everyone should have the sensibilities of writers so that they appreciate Stranger than Fiction the way I do." It's still elitism. I'm not a standup comic, never will be, and don't even like to hang out with them. If I, the audience, don't appreciate something, it's not my fault. I'm just passively sitting here like a lump of shit. It's the job of entertainers to entertain. Maybe the audience is "fellow standup comics." That's fine. You still don't get to lash out at people for not appreciating the dark genius of Tom Green jacking off a horse.