And all Disney had to do avoid this was not donate to politicians.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Bob Chapek's response to Florida's 'Don't Say Gay' bill
- Thread starter Disney Analyst
- Start date
- Status
I remember it clear as day.
It was performative outrage at its saddest. Southern Baptists still went to the park.
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
The difference is, Disney didn't actually have a gay agenda 20 years ago.
And political contributions weren't as easy for the average person to find 20 years ago.
If Disney's contributions to Florida republicans in power hadn't been outed, we'd never be talking about this.
Also, what is a "gay agenda?"
That's what the Southern Baptist group probably thought as it did not align with their values when Disney started giving health benefits to cast members partners among other things.
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
You can debate whether this is good or bad all day long, but you can't really debate that it doesn't exist.
(The article is biased and clearly written by someone with an agenda of their own, but the video sort of speaks for itself even without the spin.)
Disney exec cops to advancing ‘gay agenda’ by ‘adding queerness’ to shows
A Disney producer admitted to pushing a “not-at-all-secret gay agenda” for children’s animation, as Florida Gov. DeSantis signed the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law.
nypost.com
Are you under the impression that Disney exclusively or even primarily contributes to Republicans?
Oh, you mean performative wokeness?You can debate whether this is good or bad all day long, but you can't really debate that it doesn't exist.
Disney exec cops to advancing ‘gay agenda’ by ‘adding queerness’ to shows
A Disney producer admitted to pushing a “not-at-all-secret gay agenda” for children’s animation, as Florida Gov. DeSantis signed the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law.
Almost every major corporation in the US does it to an extent. It's a nice counterbalance to the pseudo populist performative right wing rage whenever underrepresented groups are given the spotlight for just a moment.
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
Tucker Carlson's job is to set his own hair on fire to an audience of 4 million viewers on a good night. Bob Chapek's job is to sell entertainment content and experiences to hundreds of millions of people every year. You can't let your company be run by a progressive niche (or a right wing niche) when your entire business model is built on universal appeal.
Fair enough.
So you don't put your company in a position where they have to publicly take a stance.
Unfortunately, they donated to the wrong politicians, it was made public, and now there's no good out for them.
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
Oh, I completely agree with this. In fact, I think it would have been a lot smarter for Disney to signal that it was pausing work on the new campus or reconsidering relocation based on concerns about the well-being of their employees or something like that. That would be a response that both used some of the leverage Disney has and would have shown there could be some economic consequences for Florida of politicians going too far down the road of baiting/courting a social conservative base. Perhaps they should actually cancel the move if employee sentiment is overwhelming negative.
Putting out a statement that you are going to work to defeat legislation passed by elected officials, though, is needlessly provocative and looks like a company trying to directly interfere with the democratic process. Again, I say that from the perspective of someone who would be happy to see it defeated but recognise the optics are not helpful. This new position only encourages proponents of the bill to double down and promote a siege mentality with Disney as a particularly attractive foil representing the forces of wokeness trying to undermine parents and corrupt children.
Maybe I'm out of touch, but both of these things seem like pretty niche concerns compared to the benefit to Disney of having Star Wars and all the Fox properties under the company's umbrella and on Disney+.
Hopefully this is like that, but my suspicion is that the environment is very different in 2022. I wasn't there so I don't know if the intensity of political divisions are any deeper, but there is certainly now a very well-developed media echo-system set up to fan these flames that didn't exist at the time. I'm also not sure the Southern Baptist Convention boycott of Disney was championed in quite the same way by one of the two major political parties and, particularly, its most likely upcoming presidential candidate.
Last edited:
Vegas Disney Fan
Well-Known Member
It’s also unfortunate our corrupt political system makes contributing to everyone standard practice in return for political favors.
Gotta grease a few palms if you want several hundred million dollars in tax incentives, whether an office park in Lake Nona or a luxury Hotel in Anaheim. Pay to play is how US politics works.
Hopefully Disney has learned it’s not worth it and they stop contributing to everyone, they make enough profit they don’t need the incentives, or the strings attached to them, or the controversy attached to them.
Eh, the US isn't that special. This happens across the world, it's just other countries call it corruption, whereas the US codified and regulated it.
Nope. Like every major corporation, they donate to every single politician in the jurisdictions where they do business.
AdventureHasAName
Well-Known Member
I disagree.
As the society becomes more diverse, Disney's content needs to reflect that. It's not 1950 anymore, it's 2022.
They need to be realistic about it though, not the performative wokeness they showed in the video.
Bill in Atlanta
Well-Known Member
This time the frustration seems to be coupled with more action rather than performance. I'm hearing about a lot of Disney+ and trip cancelations. These are people who never liked Disney's pandering on these issues, but have finally had enough. My wife books trips to WDW as a travel agent so we have a unique view into how people are thinking.
I always said that conservatives would keep going to WDW regardless of Disney's leftward march because the place is so awesome. I'm not so sure about that now.
GimpYancIent
Well-Known Member
What was described in the video is not about inclusiveness or diversity it's about subliminal suggestion to children a specific agenda. She seems to think its clever, imaginative and exiting, welllll, it's not. To inject hidden content and cues that are not relevant to a story to simply advance an agenda to children. If anything, that is perverse.
That was the performative part of it. If it sounds like surreal compensatory bull, it probably is.
I guess they can enjoy the Ark Encounter. I'll enjoy fewer people in line at the park.
Also, for every guest that cancels, there's another one that'll come in.
AdventureHasAName
Well-Known Member
That may be the stated purpose of the department (and what the corporate leadership thought they were facilitating when they green lit its creation) ...
... but this is what the people working in the department think is its purpose. And it is what the department has become and the function it is performing. And it is cancerous. They (the department employees) thought they were hiding its true nature from the public (because they know it is repellant to the vast majority of the fanbase), but now it is out in the open. The people in those videos have both (a) mental illness, and (b) agendas they intend to implement.
- Status