I think she was damn right! She narrowed the potential viewing circumstances to the one that seemed most important. That's all you can do. You can't calibrate the world....you can only calibrate your workflow.
She was, that is why I referenced the anecdote. But she was working to the output viewing conditions, not the sterile fully profiled and managed workstation conditions.
Final output viewing conditions are all that matters, if you are outputting your images, if you aren't then by definition it is moot because you don't have any.
Don't forget though that they now know which sort of look looks best on the newsstand and since they have calibrated monitors they can reliable aim to hit close to that to begin with from then on.
And I still wouldn't discount the lone screen thing so much. Again most photos you take are seen by yourself and most and most often on screen. And the for others who see your stuff, it's online that will total the largest amount of views for most people.
And the varying conditions for prints thing, yeah, but all the same I find it way easier to get prints that seem reasonable when basing off of a color-managed monitor then one set to who knows what.
And you always have a decent starting point. You don't need to re-edit your images completely every time you move to a new screen or a new printer etc.