In YouTube comments and on Twitter, fans of Krasinski's feel-good YouTube show expressed disappointment that he would cash out to a big corporation. As a film professor put it on Twitter: “You got to love when what seemed like an act of goodwill during a pandemic can be auctioned off to the highest bidder. Mmmmm taste that sweet sweet capitalism.” On the one hand, Krasinski isn't selling out. "I honestly don’t know all the behind-the-scenes stuff with how Some Good News was produced," says Charles Curtis. "But I can imagine it was a heavy lift for Krasinski and whoever he was working with to put together these huge episodes and magical moments. There was the technical work to get everyone on video chat, the collecting of viral videos, writing the script, etc. So it wasn’t going to last forever, and frankly, I’d rather have more SGN than no SGN. And let’s all remember entertainment is a business. Something as magical as this was never going to sit in its own bubble forever." On the other hand, Krasinski should have let Some Good News be. "Not everything needs to be flipped for a profit," says Hemel Jhaveri. "The appeal of Krasinski’s SGN was that it had a homemade, low-budget feel that gave the product it’s authenticity. Krasinski nailed the formula from the start — a 'Weekend Update' style broadcast that focused on good things, was intermittently funny and relied heavily on famous guest stars. That people immediately wanted to take it off his hands and repackage it for a ton of money is not a surprise. Neither is the fact that he sold it, though I really wished that he had let it die. SGN was a delightful internet show, and turning it into some kind of network packaged special is sure to backfire. What made his clips go viral was their sincerity. That’s impossible to replicate at the hands of a behemoth like Viacom. The show also had a singular editorial vision and zero advertising."