If an author had written a long case defending the analogy, maybe. But it was a throwaway metaphor in a headline to pique interest, so I think you're projecting

If an author had written a long case defending the analogy, maybe. But it was a throwaway metaphor in a headline to pique interest, so I think you're projecting those other unrelated concerns onto the situation. In particular, it's those complaining about how the headline wasted their time who are belittling the value of historical comparisons across very different eras and societies. Their reaction is, "What? The Incans didn't really have anything that could literally be called an Internet? You tricked me into clicking when I could have stayed even more narrowly focused on my present-day Internet-centric concerns!" Whereas instead, the headline author was trying to shake people out of their presentism with the figurative language. "There is something surprising here about the Incans", he was saying – and absolutely not any larger objectionable/anti-intellectual theme about how "there is no progress" (which is obviously unsupportable from the details on the Quipu system).