No, but they do not view the V8 negatively compared to a turbo V6 either, especially when power output is comparable or superior.
If a V8 can be similarly or more powerful, cost less, be less demanding on maintenance, and offer similar fuel economy, there is very little imperative to downsize displacement and go with forced induction. The big misconception is that there is a huge fuel economy difference between a 3.5 TTV6 and a 6.2 Pushrod NA V8. There isn't. An SHO Taurus is at 17/25 mpg, A Camaro SS is at 16/25 mpg -- both automatic. By itself, the V8 6.2 is actually lighter than the TT V6 3.5, with less plumbing under the hood and cost less to build. It makes 35 more hp and 50 more lb-ft of twist. That's without direct injection and closing that 1 mpg gap shouldn't be mission impossible.
Of course, every 3.5TT Taurus, MKS, Explorer, Flex, and MKT comes saddled with AWD for obvious reasons.
Comparing the two engines in truck applications (I know, but bear with me), the 3.5TT in the F150 dusts off the L92 in the Silverado with regards to fuel economy.
It should be interesting to see what the numbers for GM's new engines (both this and the Gen V engines) look like.