On the recent issue with a guy named John Hart who was doing a film called 59bloggers. While most people are discussing the issues around the word "blogumentary" (e.g. who owns it, who has rights to it, trademarks, etc), and while others are concerned about the actual offensive language of who said what, I still see the issue as being more about awareness.
What seemed wrong to me was that (1) Hart neglected to research "Blogumentary" once he became aware of it, (2) Hart didn't seem to have a respect for his subject matter by the way he responded to Chuck, and (3) Hart seemingly misled people into believing that others had confirmed to be filmed when apparently some had not.
There was also talk of a lynch-mob behind Chuck. As far as I know, there were only three weblog posts that appeared with less than 50 comments total on the entire subject up until Hart backed out. So what seemed like a mob was somewhere in the vicinity of 3 or 4 people. A mob is what spins off of every hyperlink, everyday on Boing Boing posts.
I think that any film maker who manages to gain access to some of the brightest and most influential people within a field should have a concern for the subject matter. If there is no concern, irresponsible decisions may be made during the creative process that impose all kinds of risks to everyone involved.
Creatively speaking, if you have anything to add to the overall vision of a film, it will be your familiarity with the subject matter. This will allow you to put the pieces together in a more insightful way.
Because John Hart was so uninformed and yet willing to piss all over the very precious matter of the subject at hand, it would never be a successful film by my definition of success.