I'm sorry if this comes across as aggressive, but your post really pisses me off so I may sound a bit irrational here. Here's the problem with your argument: she wasn't paid to do work, or because she sold a product. She basically just talked about something she wanted to do to the internet and people gave her money. That's fine and dandy if those people want to do that. But when she turns around with that money and puts out a lackluster video with shallow research, uninteresting delivery, a tired out message, six months after she announced the project... YEAH. She could have probably done this for free. Probably most of the money got put into the special effects budget and legal stuff concerning the images and video she showed. Probably so she can turn around and sell this on DVD.
Be aware that I am neither supporting nor criticising her video, nor making a judgement on how well she has used the money.
I was criticising the attitude that people should do things for free, or the idea that charging money to do something makes it less valuable. Leaving important works to those who have enough free time and contacts to be able to do everything for free rules out lots of important endeavours.
If you only ever get paid after you've done the work, then only people in a privileged enough position in the first place will ever be able to do that work. Consider that.
they just do it because it's a hobby turned career for them and people eat it up AFTER they've done the actual work.