Whether harmless or not, a person does have the right to post whatever they want but that doesn't mean they are free from consequence as was pointed out.
Alright. I had to read what she wrote after seeing this. It’s that last line. Ooof
I'm pretty sure she isn't going to harm herself. Also I'm pretty sure she has people around her at all times as she has been starring on Broadway, so not to worry.
The era of Social Media has changed the landscape of Hollywood and the entertainment industry as a whole, and really the world. The last 10-15 years or so has shown that many studios don't shy away from this stuff anymore, not even Disney. They still try to control the narrative of course, but actors/actresses are their own people essentially their own brand. The days of a studio contract where an actor/actress is tied to one studio long term and the studio controls everything are gone, and it hasn't been that way for a very long time. If an actor/actress goes too far a studio will distance themselves from them, just as Disney has done with others, but by and large they will stay out of an actor/actresses personal life including their social media posts.
Very interesting, guess a lot has changed since the days of Annette Funicello and even Hillary Duff. On one hand it's good these actors have more freedom but on another hand it can't be helping these films/brands that have so much invested already.
In those examples you're talking about child actresses when they worked for Disney. Disney is known for being very strict with their child actors. And yes things have changed, even from 20 years ago when Hilary Duff worked for the Mouse, as there was no social media.
It was a social media post made a week ago via an Instagram reel that is only available for 24 hours or less. Someone took a screenshot and that is what is being reported on, the screenshot of the post.
The first amendment doesn’t do any of these things. The Bill of Rights protects you from the government. The government CAN NOT censor your speech, but your employer could. It’s that simple. Have we all passed our 6th grade civics class?
Yeah,...I don't think you get what I just wrote. I'm giving you Burbank's defense. (in "their" mind)
The case has already been determined that she has standing. Disney lost that initial fight. Now we are in Discovery and the receipts are being collected and the people and executives involved will be called to testify on the stand.
Driving home from Disney in September, my wife and kids insisted that we stop at Buc-ee's, which we do not have in our area. I *still* cannot figure out what the big deal is about that place.“Politics and Social Issues Forum” to return on Monday, January 20th…CONFIRMED…to heck with popcorn, break out the Buc-ee’s Beaver Nuggets…!!!!!!!
View attachment 825483
Driving home from Disney in September, my wife and kids insisted that we stop at Buc-ee's, which we do not have in our area. I *still* cannot figure out what the big deal is about that place.
As you even mentioned though in another post they have no issues with working with actors/actresses that have controversial pasts. So while I could see them not using her again immediately for some projects, I doubt they will avoid her completely long term.
The First Amendment restricts the government from using its power to interfere with the freedom of its citizens.
