Seriously? I would count myself extremely lucky to be able to say that I have seen so little bad stuff in this world, that somebody allowing a fan to photograph their favourite artist is amongst the worst. Sadly, I am not that lucky and continually see things going on in this world that I consider to be more serious.
Assuming this isn't a charity event, I would imagine that it goes to the organisers, along with all the other income from the event. That is why they are holding the event, to make money. There is nothing wrong with that, it's how the world works.
They are escorted by a photographer who will tell them all that. The camera will be set up for them if they need it to be and, like any other "experience" you can buy these days, there will no doubt be a briefing beforehand on all the dos and don'ts. Again, they are escorted so are unlikely to be allowed to do anything too bad.
Probably, yes. The experience is to shoot with their choice of one artist and it states that the choice of artists is restricted, so I imagine that those artists who don't like it aren't on the list.
I can't see anything wrong in this at all. The organisers of the event are fully at liberty to decide what activities they wish to allow and promote at the event (within the law of course) and how they choose to make money from such activities.
I would imagine that numbers are restricted and you aren't going to have the photo pit filled with these people. I doubt they will prevent the pros from getting their shots.
At the end of the day these events are held for the fans, it's the fans that fill the coffers not the professional photographers. You can't blame the organisers for providing more for the fans who are willing to pay for extra access. I doubt that the organisers are too concerned about the feelings of photographers who get in for nothing. Any commercial enterprise will look to maximise earnings by giving a better experience to their customers.