You, and I, and a gazillion other user experience designers including those at Facebook, Google, Twitter, IG have “thought the idea should be that users shouldn’t need to think much to find what they’re looking”. They should not try to understand confusing interfaces. They should not read excessive documentation. Why? because that’s hard, that makes them think and they don’t want to think. I get it, people are lazy and they are all screaming “Don’t make me think, it hurts. just give me what I want”.
This mentality of prioritizing content comes with some traps. It prioritizes the response to gratification and sets a pattern through repetition, creating a solid stream of demand for content. At some point you may ask: who benefits from teaching a generation of designers to prioritize content and what is the role of that teacher in design education? Something valuable is generated in the interaction between User and content and I am guessing you already know what that is and how it is used to fine tune content.
The idea that user “should not try to understand confusing interface” or “read excessive documentation” leads to a design catered for quick reward(the content/product) enables and encourages the consumer and conditions a user to seek quick reward. For further understanding of the role of reward in conditioning refer to Pavlov, B. F. Skinner and some by T. Harris. In effect the UX idea of “make-it-snappy-for-the-user” becomes a simple but potent design strategy for that conditioning delivered to the unsuspecting user by the unsuspecting designer.
You may notice that the context of this analysis expands beyond the scope of the discipline of design. A designer is taught to think a certain way and is exposed to ideas within its own planet of confirmation bias; a planet which floats in a robust universe of Darwinian theory and human history. Questioning one means questioning all of it and in that questioning we exercise cognition and expand capacity. Becoming faster and sharper and developing ability to protect ourselves mostly from ourselves included in which are those at facebook, google and the rest. So those are not blood thirsty predators separate from you and I. They are counterparts of you and I, operating mostly with the best of intentions but for many reasons missing the unintentional effects of good intention. We must encourage thinking capacity through design because doing so works the ability to ask questions, especially when looking in the mirror. And that’s hard. That requires thinking. The easy way would be to let Social Darwinism continue laying the pattern for tech, design, social media, social anything.