Is discouraging draws at top level chess really what we want?

Everyone's always trying to keep GMs from drawing because they're boring. but are draws actually boring? I think a game where one player tries very aggressively and gets an advantage but then the other player defends admirably and swindles a draw is very exciting, whereas a game where both players are playing very defensively but then one player blunders a queen under time pressure and resigns is extremely boring. 

I think when GMs have lots of time + normal draw rules, they would feel more empowered to play aggressively and try to get an advantage, knowing that even if things don't go their they always have a chance and the time on their clock for a draw swindle. I know that when I play blitz, I usually play very passively just trying not to blunder because this is the most successful strategy in blitz, just make threats and make sure your opponent blunders before you. Isn't this the same thing top level GMs would do if you tell them they can't draw or give them very little time? Do people look at match results like 2018 Carlsen-Caruana and decide the match is boring just from 12 draws, or do they actually look at the games and see for themselves if the games are actually boring or if the players are fighting as hard as they can and are simply close in strength?

Swindles a draw?