It’s fair to recognize. Personally I do not like the aesthetic decisions that Apple makes, so if I’m taking pictures on my phone I use camera apps that’s give me more control (Halide, Leica Lux). I also have reservations about cloning away power lines or using AI in-painting. But to your example, if you got your film scanned or printed, in all likelihood someone did go in and change some stuff. Color correction and touching the contrast etc is routine at development labs. There is no tenable purist stance because there is no “traditional” amount of processing.
Some things are just so far outside the bounds of normal, and yet are still world-class photography. Just look at someone like Antoine d’Agata who shot an entire book using an iPhone accessory FLIR camera.
I would argue that there's a qualitative difference between processing that aims to get the image to the point where it's a closer rendition of how the human eye would have perceived the subject (the stuff described in TFA) vs processing that explicitly tries to make the image further from the in-person experience (removing power lines, people from the background, etc)
Some things are just so far outside the bounds of normal, and yet are still world-class photography. Just look at someone like Antoine d’Agata who shot an entire book using an iPhone accessory FLIR camera.