Why is it that if someone becomes even moderately successful, they suddenly become immune to criticism in the eyes of far too many?

For example, I was once grumbling about a crappy opening band at a metal show, and some bystander told me, “When you put out an album and go on a tour, then you can criticize them.” Or, in the middle of one of my anti-Buffy tirades, I was told that Joss Whedon must’ve done something right, since he’s had multiple television programs, and I do not, so I should shut up.

There’s clearly a case of the straw man argument at work here: I’m criticizing the creator’s work, not their fame. One’s success is not directly determined by the work itself; it’s determined based on the amount of people that enjoy it. Therefore, if you’re not specifically criticizing their success, then claiming immunity based on that is completely irrelevant to the discussion! If I was complaining about their fame, then my detractors would have been correct in calling me out, as I have no experience with being famous. (Nor would I want any!)

The closest I get to complaining about fame and success is when I see people like those idiots on Jersey Shore elevated into the upper echelons of “cool” society. Even then, I’m not complaining that they’re famous; I’m complaining that so many people in this country are so brain-dead that they watch the show and increase its popularity. The cast’s fame is just a side effect of that.

This kind of critical immunity nonsense is right up there with “You shouldn’t criticize the president, because he’s the president.” Legitimate criticism is always welcome, no matter who (or what) the target is.