There's a show on the Outdoor Channel called "The Choice", or something along those lines.
One premise of the show is that the weapon used to kill game animals is the choice of the hunter. Compound bow, recurve bow, center-fire rifle, blackpowder rifle, handgun...etc; it's your choice to use what you're comfortable using and you're not looked down upon by those who's choice is a different weapon.
On this show, they use all weapons - though compound bow much more than others. I like the premise because it does a little to break up the different camps that hunters can sometimes find themselves in all too easily.
I apply that philosophy to this topic of where to shoot. It's really your choice. It only becomes an issues when one person tries to tell another person that their choice is better.
Well, "this is better than that" with regard to shot placement is just about as subjective as any "9mm vs 45acp", "Glock vs Sig", or any other one of those "what's the best rifle/pistol/revolver/ammo" threads.
The choice you make for shot placement should involve consideration for ethics, skill level, circumstances, ...etc. By circumstance I mean: If it's the end of the season, and my meat locker is empty, I just might take a chance on that doe a little farther out than I'm used to shooting provided the conditions are close to ideal.
Make your choice. Realize it's not the only choice, and always keep all valid choices on the table as options, because sometimes your preferred choice isn't an option.
First - if I have a neck shot available, and my preferred double-lung shot behind the shoulder is unavailable, I've got no problem taking the neck shot because I do agree it's an effective shot to put down a deer and it's with in the range of ethics I practice and accept as a hunter. It's just not my preferred choice.