Her central point is:
A genealogist speaking to the Times at the weekend commented: "It is not just about collecting names. It is about understanding who you are, and how you came to be who you are today. It is about knowing yourself." Superficially that doesn't mean much - in the furthest reaches of the nature/nurture debate, nobody has ever suggested one's distant second cousin could be anything more than a curiosity. And yet that tells you all you need to know about the kind of person who family-trees for a hobby - who thinks that's time well spent, getting to "know yourself, understand who you are". If therapy is for people with more money than sense, genealogy is for those with more time than either.
Read the whole article for more invective and satire(?). Frankly, I hope that Zoe meets a nice young royal with a family tree as tall as a redwood who brags about it.
Is she right? Or is she misguided? What value does genealogy research have for you and me? Why do you and I do this? The questions need to be answered.