The article makes the point that shareholders have suffered while "Shareholder Value" was touted. History promptly proved otherwise.
Survivorship introduces bias relative to the performance of the average company, but not to the performance of the average shareholder's portfolio. The largest ETFs have been S&P 500 ETFs since 2013; the index is the best readily available proxy for average investor returns.
The companies didn't benefit, but the shareholders did. Churn rate is indicative of a competitive and healthy economy.
Removal doesn't necessarily imply failure or stagnation; mere under performance is sufficient for removal. Companies that are removed might even see their average performance regress upwards:
>Shareholders are suffering their worst investment returns since the Great Depression
This aged horribly. The S&P 500 has increased an average of ~15% per year since the article was published. That's more than twice the average over the last century.