There's a confusion and conflation of terminology here, even if the original meaning can stand on its own too.

The Weather Channel isn't an advertiser here. They're a user -- a corporate one, but they supply content they want others to view. Facebook has scaled back the organic effectiveness of creator-owned pages in an effort to drive more traffic to paid advertising. The Weather Channel is simply noticing that they're giving away content for free, and whatever benefit they derive from this content on this particular medium doesn't make up for how much it costs to produce.

Is it really a bait-and-switch? Advertisers can be pretty scientific about their use of FB. It’s standard practice to balance the amount made from acquired users against their cost of acquisition.