Research also shows that, in addition to slowing you down, multitasking lowers your IQ. A study at the University of London found that participants who multitasked during cognitive tasks experienced IQ score declines that were similar to what they'd expect if they had smoked marijuana or stayed up all night. IQ drops of 15 points for multitasking men lowered their scores to the average range of an 8-year-old child.
Now, granted these studies are looking at "can you work well while also being on your phone" or "can you watch Netflix and Youtube at the same time" so the impact of multitasking on watching a TV show that has bad editing is doubtlessly far less. But the science is there: the brain focuses best when it has fewer things to focus on.
If the viewer is thinking "Who is Anne talking to? OH right it's Jake," that's a microsecond they spend not focusing on Anne's emotional confession to having murdered their children....!! (or whatever). And it's not much but those things add up, they make the show more tiring to watch, so unless "who is she talking to?" is something the director WANTS you to wonder, like it's part of a misdirection or a reveal or something, there's no compelling reason to make things harder on the audience.
It's like someone said above: you could shoot your movie in very low lighting. In some cases, that's the perfect choice (like horror). But if it's not tied into the intent, don't do that, because people want to be able to see, and there's no reason you should deprive them of that. And "challenge the audience" isn't a compelling reason because you're actually saying "I want my audience to have a harder time focusing on the things the show is about."
Though let me be clear, I'm talking about continuity breaking things like 180 rule, not "make the shot interesting to look at."
None of that has anything to do with the 180 rule and I think you should separate them if "boring cinematography" is what you mean.
In the opening scenes of Midsommar, there's an incredible shot of two people talking. They're totally static, facing each other, but one of them is shot through a mirror while the other is at the end of a hall and out of focus. If shot in shot/reverse shot at eye level, this scene would be boring AF. But in the frame they appear to be side by side, far apart, and talking past each other. It creates emotional distance between them and carries on for long enough to be unsettling and uncomfortable, which perfectly supports the conversation about their relationship that's going on. It's unique, it holds your attention, and as the scene shifts to a more natural angle, it preserves the visual positions of right v left. A visually striking sequence that adheres to the 180 rule.
Law and Order could easily mix up their shots while preserving 180, but that's not part of their stated intent, so they don't. It's a totally valid choice even if it's a safe (possibly a boring) one.
As for the idea that consuming easy media makes it harder to enjoy more complex media, I want your wife to come testify. There are any number of reasons why someone wouldn't like Mr. Robot (I didn't) or Hannibal (visually incredible, yes, but also pretentious as all get out and borderline nonsensical in places, with heapings of gore). "The DONK DONK prevents people from appreciating GOOD crime drama" is the same argument that "people watch so many MCU movies that they refuse to watch SMART movies" or "People who listen to pop can't appreciate classical music!"
Something that requires more effort to consume is not automatically smarter, if both are accomplishing exactly what they set out to do.
