By definition, in fact. Many, many people who go see Into Darkness have either never seen a Star Trek movie or series or have not been fans of the franchise.
Well, of course some of the people in the seats are already fans, and some are not. As a literal distinction, it exists.
But that is not the point JarodRussell was making. What he's saying is that there is no easy way to distinguish between aspects of the film that connect with those two groups (or not). It's not "fans VS the general audience."
A similar sort of comparison would be something like the Avengers. Was this movie made for (1) comic fans, (2) fans of the comics and the other Marvel movies, (3) fans of only the other movies, (4) people who had never seen any of the prior movies and never read a comic in their lives?
Well, all of those groups, really. Doubtless that is part of its appeal.
Edit: In passing, that's one reason why it's so appealing for Hollywood to constantly revamp or reboot existing properties. To varying degrees, a large chunk of the audience already recognizes it and understands, broadly speaking, what it is about.
That's part of what makes the "general audiences vs. fans" idea a fallacy.
Take James Bond, as a good example.