I think there is a difference. What drives me crazy are the Kinkade fans who insist that his work is capital A "art," and going to be a collector's item, a masterpiece, etc. I like some pop culture/kitsch type things, but I don't claim they are an investment. I think it is more about the attitude of the purchaser. I don't display my Harry Potter books in order to convince visitors that I am a literary genius. I read them because I enjoy them. They aren't on display. So I believe it is the combination of displaying the "art" (something you don't do with books, music, cinema, usually) along with the insistence of some fans that Kinkade is the world's most important artist. I'd say he is among the world's marketing greats, but that's about it. But if people enjoy Kinkade and want to hang his work on every surface in their home, I say go for it-- just don't try to tell me you're doing it because he is an Important Artist, or this is an investment.
I think I would agree. People are entitled to enjoy whatever they want to enjoy, and my opinion of it shouldn't detract from their enjoyment of it.
However, to present it to me as great art or him as a great artist is going to evoke a response. I don't think that was the case here, people just started slamming him right off the bat without any provocation, which probably made some people feel defensive...
Why can't we all just get along...:)