Do you think that the article is saying that the deadlifts cannot build mass at all? Because if it seems that way, I must have left a couple of dozen sentences out! But I don't think I implied that so you are preaching to the choir if you feel the need to defend the deadlift at GUS!
Sure, you cannot get to a big deadlift without having gained an appreciable amount of muscle. I certainly am not saying that the deadlift is not good for muscle building at all!
However, LOTS of things can be said to benefit a lot of muscles and the deadlift hits about every muscle in the body. If you completely lack obviously visible spinal erectors, for instance, the deadlift will certainly help in that regard…but, again, that's not really saying anything as you could get the same apparent effect from a lot of erector work like old fashioned hyper-extensions and, gasp, straight legged deadlifts, which we know cannot really be compared to a conventional deadlift. Also…good mornings are frequently used in this regard. So, if you want to quibble, I think that speaking from a bodybuilder perspective, if your true goal is bigger erectors and even bigger glutes, there are more efficient ways to go about that. But, when we quibble, we introduce a lot of variables so it can go on forever. Such as, you could make the argument that someone who has a better strength base as owed to deadlifts will be better able to build mass through PC extension exercises that are more directly "targeting" the goal muscle. This kind of thing can go around and around.
But nobody is trying to say deadlifts don't "benefit" muscles from a mass perspective, as I think has been made obvious, but only that deadlifts don't turn you into a competition read bodybuider, which is the propoganda that is being passed around by people desperate to sell "pure" strength training to a bodybuilders for reasons of their own…which is would guess is desperation to tap in to a much bigger and broader audience.