So, as a joke, one of them mentioned that he "had been wrong."
Now in terms of Buffy, I would argue that there is a right and wrong as to whether or not it's a good show, but that's just my bias and general love for all of the media that stems from Joss Whedon's brain, with the exception of the things such as Doll House which are excepted just because I have yet to watch them.
But in general...
If something is truly just an opinion on a piece of pop culture or an aesthetic effect or whatever, can you be right or wrong about it, even if you disagree with your past self?
Or what if I don't like something because of its inherent quality? What if I like "World of Warcraft Ruined My Life," for instance, just because I used to play WoW? Am I wrong? What counts when it comes to the validity of an opinion?
Just because something appeals to you doesn't mean it's well-made, or well-done. It just means that it has...appeal. But does that mean that it did its job well, if it made people want to buy it?
See, I tend to view music and television and literature and such as art rather than as products, so I would not call "Friday" or Disney Channel or Twilight "good," but all of those (except for "Friday," I think , since it seems to be universally hated) fill their niches very, very well. They excel at what they were intended to be.
So if I say they're bad, I'm wrong by one definition. If I say they're good, I'm still wrong, but by the other definition. And both definitions are perfectly valid. And that's not even getting into the matter of personal taste.
What does that mean?
Well, it means we get to argue. A lot.