In defence of snark
Yes, it can be damaging (as can sarcasm, and I suppose the only difference between snarkiness and sarcasm is that snark can be more straightforward), but it certainly doesn't have to be. It strikes me that to attack snark as a whole is about as sensible as getting mad at, say, flippancy (and I say that as someone who admittedly uses flippancy to avoid more sincere emotions sometimes). Certainly is someone is sarcastic, or snarky, or glib all the time, without regards to context, that's damaging. But this is a real baby-with-the-bathwater situation.