I can't really blame anyone for making money on what is essentially arbitrage, but the bottom line is that they add no value to the system and they make it harder for legitimate sites to get advertising revenues (by preempting traffic and ad $$).
In theory, arbitrageurs will arbitrage away the gap until the margin revenue outweighs the cost. So, in a sense arbitrageurs are good for the markets as they bring them closer to "perfect markets".
As far as adding value bit is concerned, if the articles provided are worthwhile to users, then some value is created. (Although I feel very strongly against the idea of creating spammy blogs that he advocates.)
Meh, I don't even care about the spammy blogs. They aren't there for human consumption, and will never get enough links to be visible to humans.
The articles on the real sites are custom written, and he pays a small premium to decent content. (8-12 per it looks like), and in theory are researched a little bit.
He's creating value, then marketing it. A tiny bit spammy w/ the blogs, but it doesn't really hurt anybody (ie. humans won't see the spammy blogs).
