The problem here is that journals are relying on an open source peer review process for which they pay nothing, and then trying to cash in on the fruits of that. Blaming the reviewers is like blaming the medieval serfs for the fact that their landlords sold you rotten grain.
Even if they were paid, it would not check for this. Peer review checks formalities, obvious methodological problems, citations, that sort of stuff. It is not an independent study meant to validate data themselves.
