Which would be relevant if anybody had asked them to do that. Nobody suggested people should "memorize names and locations of cities and landmarks in a far-off country that you have no plan to visit".

I (and others, including classical education) suggested a working knowledge of work geography -- what the continents are, what the major countries are, major cities. They should also know a thing or two about their history. You know, the history of human civilization, even if they have no plans to contribute to it.

And the "instantly public availability" of information doesn't make one smarter. Only the information already accessed (and even more so, evaluated and assessed) does. Things you know are there in your mind, available for your thoughts and comprehension, can help you follow a discussion, can be used to make judgements etc. Things one can merely look up do not inform your worldview -- they are absent from it.

>Don't conflate being able to recite geographic info with knowledge. It's not knowledge, it's just... data.

Knowledge itself is just data plus understanding them in context. Without data there's no knowledge. Don't conflate potential access to data with actually knowing things.