Aside from the sketchy issue with faking 750 artist names, apparently the music is good and has good artistic intent within the genre.
According to the article, you can do deals where you trade away part of your royalty for a higher placement on those Spotify-owned playlists, which in his case seems to be the right business choice to make by far.
Why would this be problematic? Artist commonly work under one or more pseudonyms. 750 is quite a lot for sure, but is there material difference between that and just a few?
Also, the composers' names were faked as well, so there were 750 artist names and 50 composer names..
If it's focusing on SEO, they could be spreading their platform risk to not be across one or a few accounts.
Although if people feel pop music is authentic they might feel betrayed
I would suspect the best SEO consultants have worked at Google or have friends inside.
Maybe this also explains UK success in music :)
It's a pretty well known secret that a large part of why there is a Swedish cottage music industry is the historical ease of welfare fraud, on top of the already generous grants for cultural activities. You could basically get the government to not only pay for your rent, but your studio and equipment as well. Generations of Swedish musicians were living off unemployment checks while getting started. That era has drawn to a close, but there's still significant momentum left in the music industry it spawned.