Orson Scott Card Bill Cosby Bristol Palin They and others have contributed creative products of value. I'll keep tangents to a minimum because these individuals are not the focus of the post but the concept of produced product vs what the seller does once the show's over. Orson Scott Card is a notorious homophobe. Should people appreciate his products even if they might disagree with his personal views? Some say yes, some say no. I'm ambivalent having thought about the basic issue lately, though in the past I advocated that a seller would probably be more credible if they walked the talk. But in an objective viewpoint, should it matter iff a renowned vegetarian, once done with selling the goods, go to an all-you-can-eat meat buffet? Especially as the music industry would not be littered with songs whining about "do as I say not as I do". Cosby and Palin both sold wholesome family values. But behind the scenes, they didn't exactly practice what they preach. Does that invalidate what they tried to teach the world? Should they be held to the same standards they want everyone else to? There are plenty of examples of others where there's an interesting disconnect, but one could be here all day playing "namedropping". But they all tie into the basic question: Should an artist always practice what (s)he preaches? Should a person's personal beliefs matter when it comes to business transactions? Why or why not?