While I can understand the opinions of dissent, I'm not all too sure I agree, at least in full. I have a SPOT device given to me 4 years ago that has never made it out of the box, nor will it.
However, in this case rescue seems far from the "we ran out of water" type scenario. Long slide/tumble/fall, experienced a LOC of unspecified duration, sustained injury of unspecified type and magnitude, etc, etc, etc. By the article, we have no indication of his condition at the time he was hoisted out, none of us were there to assess neither the victim or the scene.
Around 12/13 (roughly) miles in at that point, you hang and reassess while hoping for a walk out, fine, I understand the approach. On the flip side, if the guy worsens, blows a pupil, he's toast as rescue is far out, especially if he crumps during the night. If he crumps on carry out by his companions, let's say down in the Access Creek drainage, good luck initiating rescue at that point.
We read of and hear about complete wastes of resource time and again every year, it's easy to become jaded and rather understandable. Yet by what I read within the posted article, I'd estimate this incident was one that at least moves into the grey area between go and no go by the little information made available. All the "wilderness training" in the world is not going to give one a wealth of clarity, take all the classes you wish, work with some of the equipment and such, get a cert... great, congrats. However, know that clarity comes with REAL LIFE experience in facing such REAL LIFE scenarios over and over again.
So let's not be in such a hurry to rush in judgement, there's plenty that is unknown.
Addition: Perhaps I should have considered the concern being over the article's implication of WM being reduced to activating SPOT.