It's not the technology so much as the tone of the video that was off-putting, I think. The Times also did some 360 video of PR devastation and nobody was shocked.
It's not the tone - it's the fact that one uses a natural disaster for self-promotion while the other does it to inform the populace about the extent of damage.
How can using any new medium in such a context NOT be seen as self-promotion? It can't. But the benefits of the new medium also shouldn't be sidelined over the fear that folks like you might get outraged over a non-issue.
I feel like it'd help to avoid saying features of your product "are really cool" as you use it to present disaster footage. Also the upbeat cartoon avatars were probably not a good choice.