Yeah, but GoPro addicts aren't videographers, they're narcissists.
This is sort of my prejudice as well. It's terrible, but until proven otherwise I usually assume that for GoPro guys the camera is the whole point of whatever they are "documenting" and kind of morphs the whole activity. Not really trying to place an absolute value system, just to ID a certain type. So a la Jeff Foxworthy:
If you have a 6 minute road trip preamble to a 10 minute fishing video, you might own a GoPro
If you think it is cool to dub death metal over video of a pastoral setting, you might own a GoPro.
If you don't see a problem with bringing a drone into a national park and buzzing the other visitors and the wildlife, you very well may own a GoPro.
But most definitely..
If you tend to mistreat fish you just caught and tend to view them first as an "actor" in your creation, and only as an afterthought take care not cause them undue stress, then you probably own a GoPro.
(I'm thinking not at all about this one, full disclosure, but of case like the guys from Montana last year that wanted to get lot of underwater footage. The raw footage showed they had some of the fish on for like 10 minutes to get just the right shots, and so on)
I've seen some some heartbreakingly beautiful and moving videos put together using one, so I guess it is the just the center of the bell curve and ones done specifically for YouTube that give them a bad name.
I enjoyed this one too, btw. It is easy to get distracted by documenting all the beautiful fish! OP is on my bucket list. I've backpacked there but never fished.