Strangely enough, I don't mind blowouts in the NHL. I guess in my mind it's an even playing field where teams, in theory, have access to any of the available players and teams are always improving or declining (except for stupid Detroit whose always near the top of the pack).
The same can't be said in international hockey. A number of countries are beginning to develop their hockey programs which is wonderful but they get absolutely trounced regularly in tournaments by the big four clubs (Canada, Sweden, Russia, and the U.S.). It's not fun to watch. Once one of those teams hits four goals (except against each other), you can pretty much guarantee the game is over.
The problem is much worse in women's international hockey where there are just the big two. In essence, other countries are playing for the bronze.
I'm not sure whether or not these blowouts are good for the sport (e.g., discussions of women's ice hockey being potentially dropped in future winter Olympics). Perhaps it is one of the first stepping stones in building a successful hockey program in these countries (e.g., see Finland's blowouts in early Olympics; Switzerland's improvement in recent years).
Whether it's good or not for the sport, I wish there was a little compassion by coaches in reducing the magnitude of blowouts (e.g., give your fourth line a little more ice time or if you want to preserve a shutout/one goal against game, roll your shutdown lines for most of the time remaining); they're really boring to watch.