this mistake could be pilot, mechanic, regulation or organisational. In the end it potentially makes no difference.
Like all accidents, it will be a combination of some of these.
It makes a difference - I'm sure there are some families who can explain it in very dramatic terms.
This was a voluntary entertainment activity which went very bad. There was no
need for the pilot to fly that maneuver, particularly in the minds of people who had zero interest in the airshow, and were just going about their business. Sure, it's exciting to watch the air displays, but society in general does not
need them.
Society does need a fire truck driving down a road to an emergency call, and had a fire truck struck and killed 11 people, you can imagine the outrage. it would be very slightly tempered by the need for that truck to drive there, so the airshow is less vital than that.
The CAA cannot be seen to not be taking decisive action. If we pilots don't embrace the idea that improved assurance of public safety is needed, greater yet restrictions will be imposed upon us. Display aviation's best interests would be served by the leaders in the airshow industry, both pilots and organizers, stepping up to present ideas for improvement, rather than appearing to resist.
Example: In Canada, a long time ago, flying aircraft with what a pilot judged to be small amounts of frost on the wings was quietly tolerated. It might have been a factor in the occasional accident of a light aircraft, flown by an unwitting pilot, but little was done to highlight it as a danger, much less prohibit it. Then a crew crashed an airliner in northern Ontario, and frost on the wings was a prime factor. Well Transport Canada went wild with absolute regulation about no tolerance for any frozen contamination - I'm surprised they still let us fly in the rain! It was reactive, as will be the CAA changes which are inevitable form this event.
If an industry/activity survives below the horizon of public awareness of risk, it may continue. But once an excessive risk is identified, the regulator can't not take action - they represent the entire public, and they're going to be seen to make a difference. probably by reaction to the side of caution.
We must accept the work of the AAIB and CAA as being the outcome of the best effort in the public interest, or risk being branded more as unsafe risk takers, and incur prolonged scrutiny and more regulation.