A pet hate of mine in philosophy is this super-subjective "if no-one saw it, it didn't happen" line of thinking, which this guy seems to embody (from what it says about him on the Wiki page, anyway). The idea that conscious observers somehow project 'reality' onto the world. I find this idea sophomoric, childish and ridiculously anthropocentric - taken to an extreme, it's the logic of a retarded kid playing hide-and-seek who simply shuts his eyes because he believes this renders him invisible.
Your disdain for solipsism is creditable; it's a pity that the caricature above bears no relationship to anything Baudrillard wrote; more alarmingly, I can't see how you've derived it from the Wikipedia entry, either.
Baudrillard famously wrote against
the subject, for one thing.
The 'if no-one saw it, it didn't happen' position is not one entertained by Baudrillard. He argued that, increasingly, things only happen BECAUSE they are, or will be, seen. The media gaze instigates pseudo-events, 'happenings' which would never take place unless they were filmed or reported. Who can seriously gainsay this, in an age of ubiquitous PR and spin - activities, which, as we well know, dominate military logic as much as anything else? Terrorism, too, is unthinkable outside the media responses it seeks to evoke.
Baudrillard's prescience is astonshing. For instance, he understood, way back in the 70s, the implications that 'reality TV' would have for media and entertainment...