Reading through the text which implicitly and as a perlocutionary/performative act by the author is precisely intended to be not the kind of low-effort content of the evoked 'Ennui Engine', actually strengthens my perception why I would actually feel more enjoyment in the "low effort content":

The relatively long suspense of the "Cargo Cult"-like explanation at the end completely falls short of any built up expectations I had, I wouldn't have noticed a difference in the argument if it would have been left out. Instead it seems to function merely as an ornament to elicit some feeling of superiority in one's insight.

I mean if I am able to "explain" cargo cult to you it would be least expected to be cargo cult'ed by the very thing. The text touches on that briefly but suddenly rejects its humbling implications for all the facets of our life by highlighting one aspect: >its most insidious and impactful manifestations lies in entertainment and how we consume it. Where does this uncanny certainty come from?

Not to end on a negative note: Why not trying to appreciate some low-effort boredom at a time? Not something to be avoided at all cost but as an highly viscous opening space in one's rapidly passing sense of time, being mostly empty ("boring") or worn out of preconceived notions, but yet to be taken roads, train of thoughts or in some very rare cases, I'm told, for inspiration. Some appreciation for boredom goes a long way and makes oneself intrinsically less prone to the trappings of the described engine by just waiting "it" out.