Yes, but I'm not necessarily always talking about the decision to have interesting backgrounds or not. I think that is certainly a factor in many cases, but in many posed situations you CAN make those creative decisions anyways, often times before we go out and do bigger shoots we'll scout locations a few days ahead of time with some cameras and take a few test frames at each spot. It's not always helpful, but usually it is.
I think it was meant to be more about simple composition and not letting the harder focused back image conflict too much with the front one. Composition for many, in many situations is about what's always on the one 2 dimensional line (I realize that photos are all 2D), but when you're taking them, before the photo is captured you're having to think more about background composition with your subject(s).
And yes, the original post does say that it all depends, and it's more about knowing when and why you want to stop down the lens, and how much.
When I first got my 50L I wanted to shoot everything wide open. And did, mostly. Same when I got my 645 camera and the 80mm f/1.9 lens. Wide open. But after a while I realized it was often a crutch. So now it's more about those clear choices.
I do think that lost of people who do not understand the basics of photography, like the mother at the wedding, or what not, are fascinated by the blur in the background and believe it sets things apart from the aunt or uncle with the kit lens and consumer body who shoot on Auto and regularly are at f/13 or f/6.3 or whatever. But also, just taking note from very well established and very groundbreaking photographers, it's more about the ultimate choice to know when to stop down, and why. For instance, many of the photos that have really changed the world, or will always be remembered, (or not, or just some of the better recognized photographers) are showing a lot of context in their work, which usually means showing more in the photo, not less.
I'm shooting at 28 weddings this season, and then the other shooting with models each week, and I've been taking this into account far more this year than the last two of shooting more seriously. I think it also comes from shooting far more film this year for my projects and work related shooting. Sometimes you're not always given the option to shoot at 1/8000 and f/1.2 at ISO 50 and then 10 minutes later set it the other way around with f/11 at ISO 800 and 1/250 or whatever. Sometimes it's less flexible if you're not 100% prepared, which often it's not worth it to be with film, lately though, I guess I'm adapting to that. But still, not all systems are built with super fast lenses anyways, and I feel much better working with those limits in that space. Especially with medium format, which is what the vast majority of my work is done with.
