If we're judging by that metric, I might as well discard ~95% of the content of any given medium because some element of it has been worsened by the creator(s) trying to appeal to one group or another. If you look hard enough you can find that sort of influence in damned near everything, including much of the Capital-L Literature that a certain arrogant class of academic enjoys vigorously analyzing.
Don't get me wrong -- HSotD and similar shows are terrible, mindless shit in a myriad of ways, but I prefer to look for the good in things rather than tossing them over my shoulder. Granted, I'll spend a hell of a lot less time with things that are 10% interesting concepts and 90% terrible, view-driven drivel, but if you dismiss everything that doesn't meet your arbitrarily high standard (At what point does something change from being good design to pandering, when the appeal stops scratching your particular hangups?), you'll quickly find that you're spending more time sneering than enjoying, at least in my experience.
Maybe this is just my old grudge against academic snobbery flaring up again, so it might be best to disregard.
Anyhow, in case I was not sufficiently clear before: I am not saying not to judge things for being shitty. I'm say to judge them for the right reasons: because they're shitty, rather than because they incidentally were made shitty in the process of trying to hit target demographics.
Author
Topic: I like anime, do you like anime? (Read 3135811 times)