My opinion...
The Hunter accident has similarities to the more recent Pitts accident in Austria, and to a lesser degree, the in flight break up accident. However, the Pitts, and the other aircraft were not iconic, historic ex-military, and they did not draw very public non aviation negative attention to our industry.
Airshows are a "want" not a "need" for the public, and in aviation. That statement is not intended to be provocative, but it's a reality. Airshows hold great value in promoting our industry to the public, and inspiring people, but like any "watch me" event, people are watching, and when it does not go well, the public will turn on their collective heal, and hold the "rich kids in their toys" in disdain.
The public is attracted by excitement and risk, but they will quickly empathize with the underdog, those innocents who suffered, and turn away from aviation. Even we, pilots, might begin to feel less sympathetic when a jet is crashed doing low altitude aerobatics, as most of us have not "made it" there yet. Most of us would delight to even fly a Hunter, much less loop it. Yet, a Pitts is common, and "attainable" for most of us, if we try a bit.
I'm an experienced pilot. By informed choice, I have passed the point in my career where I say "watch this" to anyone other than someone who might be on board with me, during mentoring. I respect that some pilots would like to perform to the public, and I support their right to do that, to each their own. But I choose not to anymore.
I am attracted to fly in's and enjoy fly pasts. Not so much for aerobatics. I have watched an aerobatic performer enter a suicidal maneuver right in front of me, and that pretty well ended my interest in watching low level aerobatics.
So I will have different reactions to accidents, relative to my experiences, and personal preferences in flying.