Couldn't agree more with the above. And it hits the button of one of my own personal broken records, PLAUSIBILITY versus REALISM.
We don't actually want realism. Whether we're fans of LOST, Simpsons, comicbooks (the last 250,000 as I call those fans), movies or major league baseball, on some level we know it's pointless, fake and indeed to a large extent, corrupt. However, if we like or love something, we suspend disbelief. What helps us suspend disbelief is of course, ad contrae, a level of realism, but only enough to allow what is shown to us to remain PLAUSIBLE. In other words entertainment relies on being plausible, and plausibility is about belief, not about realism. In fact the moment actual non-fanwank examination is carried out on any tall tale, be it movie, sporting event or anything else, the masquerade falls apart at once. Hence: plausible good, realism bad for storytelling.
It's almost the anti-documentary approach. For documentaries the sin used to be going for plausibility ie emotional appeal or a priori rather than dry fact. With the Civil War and other more personal story based approaches, and with the modern refinement to mass media mind control in the quietyl pervasive buzzword "narrative", there is a covert but deliberate attempt to blur realism and plausibility. Stupid stupid stupid STUPID. That is not how hypnosis works*! /Morbo
*although hypnosis also doesn't work how the fuckwits who take eg wikipedia as gospel think it does either.
Check out my Alien Bodies wiki and do some searches under mind control, cia and hypnosis.