I have seen most of the movies that the article talked about. Although there were historical and factual inaccuracies, I didn't feel like it was a problem. When I watch a movie, I don't think of it as a reliable source of information that should be taken seriously. Zero Dark Thirty obviously dramatized the process of finding Bin Laden. But, it makes for a good movie that Americans generally loved. But, it still caused people to be upset at the United States' interrogation processes, even though in real life torture wasn't involved in getting the information about Bin Laden's whereabouts. People blindly took it to be fact and didn't fact-check their information.
I don't think that people should be getting historical information from films exclusively, so I don't think that filmmakers have an obligation to be accurate. We shouldn't expect them to be either. Films are a part of the media, and no doubt influence people in our society, but people vote with their wallets. If we don't like historical inaccuracies, we should not go watch those movies. I actually don't have a problem with any form of media being inaccurate. In today's society, we have so many different ways to check information. I don't think that a person should take any form of media as fact without looking into it further.
I do agree that there are times when a movie should be accurate. A documentary is expected to be trustworthy, and it will get a terrible reputation if people find out it isn't true. But, the films talked about in the article are entertainment. I don't expect Transformers to be accurate about the history of the Autobots and Decepticons, so I also don't expect a movie like Zero Dark Thirty or Argo to be 100% accurate either.
So, overall, accuracy in film is an admirable quality, but to expect it is putting way too much faith in Hollywood. Sources of information have to build credibility, and the movie industry definitely doesn't have any at the moment.