This film has a reputation of being an endless slam job on Martha Stewart. This is partly true. But I don't think it's been that much of a secret Martha Stewart sometimes berates staff. So did Charlie Chaplin. So did Milton Berle. So did Gustav Mahler. So did Johnny Carson. The latter four are generally beloved to many people, because of comparisons between misery inflicted and joy provided.
What I think measures a film's point of view is what it shows the person accomplished. Ms. Stewart's brilliance at pioneering a new kind of TV and making a billion dollars in the process is part of that. But also, at the end, when her reputation is supposedly crumbling (actually, it never seems to have), the fact that when she visits an agricultural fair and literally everybody there mobs her with their admiration says the rest. Compare the misery she's inflicted on a few to the happiness she's brought her viewers. This film's end says there's no comparison. And if you don't agree, you can make the same argument about Chaplin, Berle, Mahler, and Carson.
What I think measures a film's point of view is what it shows the person accomplished. Ms. Stewart's brilliance at pioneering a new kind of TV and making a billion dollars in the process is part of that. But also, at the end, when her reputation is supposedly crumbling (actually, it never seems to have), the fact that when she visits an agricultural fair and literally everybody there mobs her with their admiration says the rest. Compare the misery she's inflicted on a few to the happiness she's brought her viewers. This film's end says there's no comparison. And if you don't agree, you can make the same argument about Chaplin, Berle, Mahler, and Carson.