Lobster is bad. Bello is bad. They're bad because they are ill-designed typefaces that leave much to be desired in the realm of readability and just the general aesthetic. They're display fonts that you can't compare to something like Gotham that can be used as display, headline or body.
Saying Gotham is overused is like saying Arial, Tahoma, Verdana are overused for web. If it is clean, visible at a distance and generic looking enough not to be annoying, it's hard to say it is overused, much like Helvetica.
Note: I say this as a designer that sees Lobster and Bello used (almost literally) hundreds of times a day in various capacities, a lot like Museo back in the day (yuck). Not sure if it is because they're Google fonts or if one startup used it and therefore every company had to use it, but in most situations they're the completely wrong type to use and when you see them, it's usually a sign of indolence/ignorance or lack of a real designer.
What you're saying is that Lobster, Bello, and Museo offend your sensibilities and are used frequently. That doesn't mean they are of poor quality. Bad choices? Maybe. Bad typeface designs? No.
I think there are a couple of things at play here:
The aesthetic - as art, tastes are subjective (and there is no accounting for them), there's basically stuff you like and stuff you don't like. Right or wrong, for many people, liking and not liking translates to "good" and "bad". For example, "Comic Sans is bad because it's ugly".
The craft - the technical parts (i.e., kerning, spacing, scaling) are much more objective and have more to do with quality, so it's easier to classify stuff as good or bad. For example, "Comic Sans is bad because its kerning is broken".
I usually ignore aesthetic commentary - everyone's different. Some people like the way Comic Sans looks, and that's OK.
On the other hand, I do think criticisms on the craftsmanship are valuable, especially as a non-designer.
Everything's subjective to a point, but when it doesn't scale and people are using them for tiny app logos and subheadings, sensibility has nothing to do with it. Not to mention these fonts are generally used in conjunction with some pretty terrible layer or CSS effects.
Saying Gotham is overused is like saying Arial, Tahoma, Verdana are overused for web. If it is clean, visible at a distance and generic looking enough not to be annoying, it's hard to say it is overused, much like Helvetica.
Note: I say this as a designer that sees Lobster and Bello used (almost literally) hundreds of times a day in various capacities, a lot like Museo back in the day (yuck). Not sure if it is because they're Google fonts or if one startup used it and therefore every company had to use it, but in most situations they're the completely wrong type to use and when you see them, it's usually a sign of indolence/ignorance or lack of a real designer.