Disney shareholders are demanding answers following the short-lived ousting of Jimmy Kimmel, and alleging that the late-night talk show host’s removal may have amounted to "capitulating to government pressure” — and is a potential violation of their shareholder rights.The American Federation of Teac...
I think the difference there is that there’s no evidence of government meddling and intervention. Whereas here, there is.
I disagree - the US government, at least the conservative side, heavily curated their followers against a significant number of freedoms associated with queer and BIPOC folk. They played a very large role in creating the harmful, hateful aura that is the reason for US corporations’ erasure of those types of people. Cultivating hatred, manifesting as misogyny / homophobia / racism / nationalism / polarisation, is one of the most famous traits of US national and/or local leadership. They are responsible for inspiring other countries to persecute innocent people.
You can argue the cultural changes and political changes of government caused Disney to make a decision out of an abundance of caution - but there was no effort, no phone call, no threat of retaliation to Disney if they chose to air that episode. This is not the same as the Kimmel situation.
No, it’s not. While Disney refuses to be transparent, I’m sure the audience for Win or Lose was far lower than Kimmel’s 2m per episode
However
The lack of action with WoL was partially caused by the political influence. A systemic issue permeates every aspect of life.