"In April 1965, meprobamate was removed from the list of tranquilizers when experts ruled that the drug was a sedative, instead. The U.S. Pharmacopoeia published the ruling. At the same time, the Medical Letter disclosed that meprobamate could be addictive at doses not much above recommended. In December 1967, meprobamate was placed under abuse control amendments to the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Records on production and distribution were required to be kept. Limits were placed on prescription duration and refills." [1]

I feel like the linked article mostly involve a standard and rather disingenuous way of deflecting worry about psychiatric drugs such as this.

The first point is describing the worry about psychiatric drugs in terms of their marketing - that the use of these drugs comes from marketing rather than legitimate need. Then the article goes on to describe a drug that became successful without marketing, which might, maybe, seem to deflect this criticism.

I would say that the basic criticism of psychiatric drug isn't necessarily simply that their use is spread by marketing but that portion of their use happens in the fashion of illegal drugs - they're addictively mood enhancing. Of course, aggressive sales would leverage this situation. But if you muddy the waters in your initial discussion of the supposed problem, you avoid having to deal with this particular combination of problems.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meprobamate