Might be true, but I don't think the case presented here is very compelling.

The general problem is it interprets the evidence to fit the conclusion: studies showing a placebo effect are interpreted as having bad methodology while ones showing no effect are interpreted as having correct methodology.

Of course, study design can exaggerate the effect. Does that mean it's doesn't exist, though?

Probably the more general problem is that contrarian views get clicks (and all that goes with that) which creates an unfortunate incentive.