Liz, nice to see you, it's been a while. Maybe we'll catch up at another conference. Anyway, my comment:
Here's my idea: Stop thinking of Facebook as even an option for marketing...because it's not. At this point, it's an advertising platform. Everything you just described in this article would be better suited to email marketing than Facebook. Creating good content for your individual audience and optimizing to their needs is the name of every game, not just Facebook. But only Facebook throttles organic reach. Quality content has less chance being seen on Facebook than anywhere else unless you buy ads of course.
And I'm definitely one of those people that would settle on "agree to disagree" because I've heard every explanation about why the algorithm is built the way it is, and all the pitches about how the newsfeed is designed for humans and it's all BS. Facebook has designed this algorithm for one purpose: control. Control = money.
If Facebook were really concerned about relevance the solution isn't a better algorithm, but better lists and filters. Make a friends newsfeed, make a page newsfeed and let people slice and dice it. Right now it takes 2 clicks to get to any list, or 3 or more on the mobile app. And there is no quick and easy way to filter any of them.
Facebook pages have every right to be upset, managers have every right to be angry, they were sold a bill of goods under false pretenses. I cannot fathom why anyone would stand up for Facebook when their goal is so clearly to drive ad revenue, not to deliver relevance.
Further, to address the "high quality content" issue: if no one sees the content in the first place, how can you know if it's high quality of just not being shown? Facebook doesn't even give the high quality content a chance to perform.