There are many sites with no heart and soul but I don't think Google regard content based on lousy copywriting, SEO-tools (as a min. their own services) as spam. Apparently autoblogs are not even picked up as spam so your feeling of stats probably differ from Googles.
I don't run in to that many obvious spam blogs or websites. Am more hunted by crappy sites with a bit of original content but that overall are copycats, typically also big fans of ads and affiliate links. They might have read about copywriting but do not have the skills. 10 best ways of.., 5 most popular.., Apple/iphone, gossip sites and so on. Whatever topic is popular, whatever niche is dug up will get loads of useless sites circling around it. But not really what Google is fighting or regard as spam? As not to get lost in definitions I just use crap as a category. Also includes idiotic placement of ads and definitely any type of masking affiliate links. If I see that admin is not ranked much higher than the dude coming with new and improved autoblog setup next month. Intentions are related. This type of noise have increased dramatically, also via easy to use tools and ready to go super themes etc., any idiot can do it, but also a personal preference. Technically category is probably not spam by Googles definition.