If a person's behavior has a harmful impact on others and society, others or society can certainly blame and interfere with him. But what if this is not the case? For example, if a person smokes in the house where he lives alone, a person yells in the wilderness, and a person surfs the Internet in the middle of the night, should we care? In my opinion, whether or not to interfere with an act depends on whether such interference is conducive to the improvement of the public interest, whether it infringes upon the legitimate rights of the parties, and so on.
The speaker in the subject is most willing to say that acts that do not harm the interests of others should not be criticized and interfered by society.