Recently, a successful game developer made an offensive joke and a once famous book author made an offensive tweet. In both cases, many fans were left torn between the sides of liking their works and disliking the person behind the work. This kind of thing is nothing new and has happened countless times of course, but for many people it's not something that's given much thought until it happens with an artist they follow the works of. The reality is, even if morality is objective, there's probably not a single person who has lived life as an adult without having done something that'd be considered wrong.
On the other hand, with ethics being subjective, standards change and more things are discovered that make people in the past look worse than they were considered in their time period.
As artists and creators it's true that in a way we put part of ourselves into what we make, mentally. We can't write a story with words we've never heard. We can make up words that don't exist from sounds of letters we've heard before, but at the end of the day what we can make is limited to what's in our mind. So, if you like something that you feel you can even relate to and the person who made it turns out to be a serial killer or even worse, what is the right way to react? There isn't one, because that creator may not even be the same person who made what it is you enjoy.
If they are, it may not have that part of them at all. If it does, it may be a more generalized interpretation of a struggle they felt that can help people prevent becoming like them (which is something that's relatively common with the works of people who have committed suicide, not that I'd consider that a crime). It all varies, but nothing changes the work that it is. In the end, let it be a reminder that we're all human and imperfect. Sometimes, even the most seemingly pure-hearted person can be driven to do terrible things. It doesn't justify their actions or make anything any better, but nobody has just one simple side to them. People are complex and will almost always at the very least have a view on something that you'll disagree with. Even at worst, their works can possibly provide some sort of insight into their mind and feelings. A criminal does not become a criminal because of a single song, image or story though; if anything, they are prevented from it by being reminded that they aren't alone. When it comes to views alone, the things we like about works like this can be what help us understand things about eachother as people or as a society despite our differences.
Things get a bit more complicated with the creator is still alive. In that case, if the situation is below the reach of the legal system of their country, the question is more so about helping support the creator of whatever work it is you like financially usually. If you don't want to do that, you can look into buying their works from a third party if it's physical. If you can't do that and you want whatever it is, the question becomes something along the line of if you're alright with stealing from them. This ranges from: "is it okay to steal from a criminal?", to: "is it okay to steal from someone I disagree with?" It may help you (whoever is reading) to decide based on your own views, but I would say neither case justifies stealing. Even if that creator did nothing but wrong actions throughout their entire life, that one right thing they did to create something other people could enjoy should be rewarded. If that person changed over time, let them be reminded of what they did with a part of who they could be or what they could be doing different. It's as simple as that.
Okay, so supporting the work of an artist that's done something bad probably won't help to exactly reform them in most cases, but that's what things like serving time in prison are for. If you don't agree with the legal system on how harsh the punishment was (or if it was evaded entirely in your opinion), it's your own personal decision at the end of it all. Just don't forget that even with all that said, there's usually more than one person behind most works. Very few games for example are made by just one person when things like programming, graphics, writing, music and countless other potential things are involved. The same can go for many other creative works. In some cases, you should ask yourself if an entire team or group of people deserve to suffer for the mistakes or crimes of one member or person in charge.
Okay, so supporting the work of an artist that's done something bad probably won't help to exactly reform them in most cases, but that's what things like serving time in prison are for. If you don't agree with the legal system on how harsh the punishment was (or if it was evaded entirely in your opinion), it's your own personal decision at the end of it all. Just don't forget that even with all that said, there's usually more than one person behind most works. Very few games for example are made by just one person when things like programming, graphics, writing, music and countless other potential things are involved. The same can go for many other creative works. In some cases, you should ask yourself if an entire team or group of people deserve to suffer for the mistakes or crimes of one member or person in charge.
Alternatively, imagine a world where we stopped buying from or supporting the ideas of people who made crucial scientific advancements just because we didn't like something they did. Sure, there are cases where the experiment itself is immoral to support, but what I'm arguing here is essentially that there's nothing wrong with using things like Nazi research done in the past if it can be used to save lives in the present.
If buying something meant directly supporting continued immoral acts, I think you'll already know, and I agree, it's something you shouldn't continue being a consumer of.
In contrast, consuming what doesn't directly support whatever bad thing the creator did likely has no real negative effect, just as Bill Cosby's actions don't change the validity of Fat Albert's positive messages.