This wouldn't be so terrible IF the "digest" offered a critical review of each article, or added some value along with the links. There are ethical ways to do this.

My publication, Reading Rhombus, exists to promote other writers. Four at a time, plus the author of the article. One of the requirements is that the four links to other content not be the author's own, nor all from one publication. And we do have submissions guidelines which must be followed.

It's not a quantity over quality thing, either. I get relatively few submissions (and will quickly reject those that clearly have not read and followed submissions guidelines). That means that each is likely to see some real time "above the fold."

An odd thing I'm seeing lately is requests, via private notes, to submit already published materials to large publications where they are GUARANTEED to get no visibility. All I can figure is that those publications are hoping to get visibility by piggy-backing onto the "infinite scroll" when someone clicks into my story. I'm not taking the bait. If a large publication approaches me like that, I have conditions. No changes whatsoever to the story, and at least one week "featured" above the fold. ;) No one has yet agreed to that, so I'm sticking to my own profile for now, or with publications I know care more about quality than about numbers. There are some, you just have to look very hard to find them.