No, one is taking a group with divers characteristics (everyone born between 1980 and 2000) and ascribing them all to be the same. The other is categorizing people based off of how they act in relation to those actions.
I will grant, that being more specific and stating that it is ignorance in the given area (rather than global) and they deserve to be ignored on that subject (rather than on all subjects) would make Newtosavage's statement more consistent and accurate in application.
However, one could further state that the act of ignoring ignorance, rather than attempting to correct it, is laziness in and of itself. Though I would choose to define it as picking ones battles.
It is also fair to note that the baseline function of the human brain is to use heuristics and forming conclusions about entire groups from limited samples that are biased by what annoys us (lets face it, things that don't annoy us are less likely to be remembered) is normal. So using the heuristic is normal and understandable. Rather it is the refusal to reevaluate it once it is challenged that pushes a person into the realm of willful ignorance worthy of being ignored.
These ideas have a strong founding in the enlightenment, which heavily influenced the thinking of the Founding Fathers. However, I'm sure some will dismiss them is millennial tripe. That said, George Barnard Shaw's statement, “A fool's brain digests philosophy into folly, science into superstition, and art into pedantry. Hence University education,” remains an accurate evaluation today over a century after his death, particularly the first part. The second depends on if the education is being applied to a fool or not.