The special thing about architecture is that it imposes on others. You can't not see a building. So I agree with the conclusion but not the reasoning. It's not users vs creators, it's the public who are not the users that get harmed by ugly buildings, even if those buildings are private and desired by those who pay for them. (The government commissioning ugly public buildings is a problem with the government, not the architects)
Meanwhile, anything on the internet you're reading/watching/listening to is by your choice.
You’re not “harmed” by an ugly building. Annoyed, maybe, but you’re not harmed. Ugly is subjective. Even if the majority agree that it is ugly, there’s likely a group that enjoys it. Should they be denied the ability to have architecture that pleases them?
Meanwhile, anything on the internet you're reading/watching/listening to is by your choice.