It is an unfortunate sign of the times that managers are judged on the "x factor" popularity ratings.
Now by that I don't mean that a manager should be hated, despised or universally a tool, rather it is a job where the best you can hope for is to be considered fair and consistent.
If everyone loves you then you are probably not making the hard decisions that must be made from time to time in those jobs, if you are universally hated then you are again not doing the job properly as it requires empathy, understanding and compassion.
If a manager does the job properly there will be elements on one side who are utterly pissed off with you, because you have not pandered to their self interest, a big group in the middle who are ambivalent "he/she is ok, they seem fair" and then the other extreme who are apostles - again for probably the wrong reasons.
These jobs are not popularity competitions, or shouldn't be, but the holder of said position should be fair, consistent and balanced - a post match review should determine some decisions favoured the pilots, some favoured the company, some suited neither I.e. They did what was best for as many people as they could.
They should look after their staff, particularly those in need (sick, troubled by personal issues etc), and do so without a big song and dance - the person involved will know you have positioned yourself between them and the people trying to mess with them, but it should be practically invisible to the majority of the troops. There shouldn't be a big "look at me I have done this for blogs" message.
Alas, my view of the world and how managers should fit in it isn't in step with the modern management paradigm. Certainly seems to not be the way of the world in either JQ or VA based on the messages above.