From the article I dont know that I need a book and a self professed critic of all things to tell me there is nothing new under the sun. If this is the gist of the book I find it rather shallow and simplistic.
If we are to adopt this point of view we might as well close up all the museums and galleries and go home. While there have been many "style" movements in all the arts, they all do the same thing. A landscape painting is a landscape, no matter if it is done impressionistic, pointilistic, etc. A sculpture is a sculpture, it can be modern or not, it can be of a weird thing or not...but it is all the same and most likely something similar has been done before.
Photo journalism is different than fine art and the photographs should not be considered in isolation, they should considered in the context of the times. A photograph of a sailor kissing a woman 55 years ago is an exceptional thing, public displays of affection were not common then and the fact that it was done in such an exuberant manner shows the sailor's happiness, today it would be a nothing picture. I think Dyer misses this completely and goes for the easy shot....typical of self professed experts on everything.