SEO brings old news to light -- unfairly?

Poynter's E-media TidBits column today explores some of the unintended consequences of "search engine optimization" -- the process whereby ads (or, in this case, related stories) are "summoned" to a Web page because of keywords in a story or story element (headlines, cutlines, behind-the-scenes coding, etc.)

In a nutshell, the Times recently implemented a search optimization strategy that increased traffic to its site -- especially to its voluminous archives. This meant that stories from decades past suddenly appeared quite prominently in current search-engine results.

So an important question arises: is this journalistically and ethically sound practice? Can we shrug our editing shoulders and say, "Well, it's an AD or a REVENUE SOURCE, after all. I have no control over that..." In the case of The NYT, the instant sidebar material could be seen as a reporting tool, no?