You don't know anything about that guy's opinion on corporate logos

You're right, I do. If he's actually one of the .001% of people who actively calls out any instance of people wearing logos, I would happily apologize for my incorrect assumptions. But I'm happy with the statistical likelihood that I'm right, largely because even if he is one of the extremely rare people who stands against logos in clothing and accessories, the vast majority of people don't, so the general point is still entirely valid.

For instance, a naive person might be inspired by the majesty of one of those massive Confederate statues, oblivious to the reason for their existence; notwithstanding their own inspiration, it would still be important for them to know why the artist created the statue.

Why? The only problem with the Confederate statues is that we do know who they are, and we do know why their celebrated. And, in that knowledge, it hurts people, particularly the black community, to celebrate those who fought for slavery. In this case, that knowledge is important because that history shouldn't be forgotten, lest we repeat it. But if that knowledge wasn't valuable and worth preserving? If we did forget who those men were and they became random fantasy images of dudes on horses with funny beards? The no, it wouldn't be important at all.

What, pray tell, is the value of knowing that a statue of a little girl was built by a hedge fund? What damage does it do anyone to forget or ignore that?