There's a big difference between bashing and fair criticism of failings, and this book is far from perfect.
As above, some of us object to a purported "real story" book which doesn't get basic facts right (e.g. the fatally flawed "TV 101" item), makes unsupported claims (that Star Trek changed network TV), and engages in myth making (the poorly made case for the show being a hit). Add to that the obvious typos (hello, ask some friends to read it and mark it up) and other writing faults.
All of that outside the photo issue.
None of that is gunning for the author or book. That is fairly leveled criticism of a type which the author—if he's serious about being accurate and producing the best books possible—should actually welcome.