After looking for reputable youtube channels for photography, I came across a B&H one where they had a live audience and were PPing audience photos.

Some of them were mild eg boost the contrast, maybe sharpen etc but this was generally the whole image. Then they started to go more indepth with photos - to the point where they bore very little resemblance to the original image.

In one example, they had an ape (maybe a gorilla?) looking at the camera. In Lightroom, they cropped it a little to chop out some distracting bit of vegetation on the right of the frame. Then they started to go beyond the basics. The remaining bit of vegetation was desaturated. The face of the ape was brightened to draw focus. They reduced highlights on various parts of the body to avoid distracting elements. They recoloured the eyes for a different look. The image looked very different to the original.

Part of me was impressed with what they could do in LR. Part of me felt it was going beyond just simple manipulation.
What do you think?

I think it's digital workflow, and that means you can do whatever the hell you want with it.
Doesn't mean it'll look good. Or even bear any resemblance to what the camera captured.
Which leads into another question - when does it stop being photography and start being an image that's been constructed in a machine?
It stops being photography after a while and starts becoming an exercise in digital artwork.
Where that line is, I can't tell you, you need to decide that for yourself.

Also, yeah, LR is a fantastic piece of software.

I have LR4 and have been using it to:
- correct lens distortion
- sharpen, rotate, or crop images
- adjust saturation/contrast/highlights/shadows/exposure

But when I do these things, it's to the whole image. I think it because manipulation when you start focussing on certain areas.