Why are Woke Western Companies so Inconsistent?

[IceJad]

Disney Self-Censors 'Simpsons' Episode Critical Of Chinese Government

A censorship expert says that the removal of the episode on Disney+ in Hong Kong is likely Disney's way of protecting "the company’s ties, current and future, in mainland China.”

www.cartoonbrew.com

Report: The Walt Disney Company And Marvel Studios To Educate Actors In Order To Placate Communist China

A new report claims that The Walt Disney Company and Marvel Studios will begin educating their actors and executives in order to placate communist China to ensure the release of future films into the country.

boundingintocomics.com

Over the past year or so many western based companies have gone full far-left ideology in their operations. Instead of remaining apolitical they have clearly chosen a side. From their political contributions to public messaging and even core products. That will be all you will notice if you're in Western countries. Warner Bros., Disney and the list goes on. They only cater to one side of the political spectrum and have openly antagonized the other. All for standing on some form of "righteous principal". An example is LGBT rights are human rights. Seems admirable that it is the hill they are willing to die on. With legions of activists backing them up.

Or so it appears on the surface. Come China! One of the largest if not arguably the largest authoritarian entity in the world. They have far worse stances on LGBT, race and freedom in general. And records of oppression they desperately tell the world to ignore at the expense of cutting you off their markets. Now these "staunch uncompromising" woke companies are more than willing - in fact self-initiated - to cater to the needs and feelings of known authoritarians. Aren't what they stand for and promote paramount to human rights? No compromise. Just look at how they act in their own borders. Same applies to their diehard activist backers.

My question is why that morality stops at the doorsteps of communist China? I know they prostrate and make low themselves for other not-so-free nations as well, China is the biggest heel-turn they make in most cases. So China is a stand-in of sorts for the others. If these companies are willing to fight the government of their countries why are they unwilling to do the same on CCP?

Rhetorical I know. RMB RMB RMB RMB.

 

[FireDragon76]

Ultimately, a company like Disney wants to make money for their shareholders. Indeed, they have a legal obligation to do so. And not many people will be so offended that they stop doing business with Disney if they remove certain programming in China, whereas Disney is supported by many LGBT persons, both as employees and as guests at their parks, and as producers and consumers of their media. So it's not really inconsistent.

 

[IceJad]

Ultimately, a company like Disney wants to make money for their shareholders. Indeed, they have a legal obligation to do so. And not many people will be so offended that they stop doing business with Disney if they remove certain programming in China, whereas Disney is supported by many LGBT persons, both as employees and as guests at their parks, and as producers and consumers of their media. So it's not really inconsistent.

Then a more correct term would be hypocritical. Same applies to the western employees that work to sustain Disney's operations in China. So in a not so obvious way it is still inconsistent morality.

 

[gaara4158]

It’s probably very puzzling if you believe media companies like Disney are ideologically motivated. I blame Fox News for spreading that nonsense. No, these companies are all about making more money, and if that means LGBT representation in the West but not the East, that’s what they’re going to do.

 

[FireDragon76]

Then a more correct term would be hypocritical. Same applies to the western employees that work to sustain Disney's operations in China. So in a not so obvious way it is still inconsistent morality.

It's not hypocritical because the only moral principle they are obliged to follow is to make money for their shareholders within the limits of the laws in the countries they do business in, including China.

 

[Tuur]

Ultimately, a company like Disney wants to make money for their shareholders. Indeed, they have a legal obligation to do so. And not many people will be so offended that they stop doing business with Disney if they remove certain programming in China, whereas Disney is supported by many LGBT persons, both as employees and as guests at their parks, and as producers and consumers of their media. So it's not really inconsistent.

At least, that's that Disney thinks. It's what any company thinks when they go to the trouble of signaling their virtue. The question is always is what the company thinks what actually is.

 

[FireDragon76]

At least, that's that Disney thinks. It's what any company thinks when they go to the trouble of signaling their virtue. The question is always is what the company thinks what actually is.

Disney wasn't "virtue signalling". If Disney make enough of their labor force and the public mad mad, people will quit or go on strike and refuse to buy their products. I actually live in Orlando, Florida, so I know what I am talking about. There are lots of gay people that work at Disney, and the people that work at Disney are unionized and some were not happy that Disney gave money to DeSantis' campaign, and people protested, which is their right.

 

[IceJad]

It’s probably very puzzling if you believe media companies like Disney are ideologically motivated. I blame Fox News for spreading that nonsense. No, these companies are all about making more money, and if that means LGBT representation in the West but not the East, that’s what they’re going to do.

You may blame Fox News but I don't consume Fox News. The pattern is obvious without resorting to right wing news narrative. Am not even a Westerner and I can see the contradictions.

Disney don't get to play the "we stand for diversity" and "we are only in it for the money" cards whenever they act diametrically opposite in different countries.

I call an ace when I see an ace.

 

[IceJad]

Disney wasn't "virtue signalling". If Disney make enough of their labor force and the public mad mad, people will quit or go on strike and refuse to buy their products. I actually live in Orlando, Florida, so I know what I am talking about. There are lots of gay people that work at Disney, and the people that work at Disney are unionized and some were not happy that Disney gave money to DeSantis' campaign, and people protested, which is their right.

That is the definition of virtue signaling. To make know you stand on a certain issue to people who cares about it. Whether they truly believe it matters not. In appearance alone they have chosen a stance. Therefore it is the prerogative of all free minded people to measure what was said to what was done/is currently doing.

 

[FireDragon76]

You may blame Fox News but I don't consume Fox News. The pattern is obvious without resorting to right wing news narrative. Am not even a Westerner and I can see the contradictions.

Disney don't get to play the "we stand for diversity" and "we are only in it for the money" cards whenever they act diametrically opposite in different countries.

I call an ace when I see an ace.

It's just being realistic. There's no contradiction between "standing for diversity" and doing business in China. Disney is powerless to change the policies of the PRC, they don't have that kind of leverage even if they wanted to (after all, they couldn't even do anything to stop the governor of Florida, a state in which they have real economic power). So they might as well make money in China for their shareholders.

 

[gaara4158]

You may blame Fox News but I don't consume Fox News. The pattern is obvious without resorting to right wing news narrative. Am not even a Westerner and I can see the contradictions.

Disney don't get to play the "we stand for diversity" and "we are only in it for the money" cards whenever they act diametrically opposite in different countries.

I call an ace when I see an ace.

Yes, we agree. Disney isn’t obviously motivated by anything other than making money off of a global audience, and they are tuning their content according to local predilections. Isn’t it reactionaries on the Right who are convinced Disney has some sort of gay agenda to push?

 

[Tuur]

Disney wasn't "virtue signalling". If Disney make enough of their labor force and the public mad mad, people will quit or go on strike and refuse to buy their products. I actually live in Orlando, Florida, so I know what I am talking about. There are lots of gay people that work at Disney, and the people that work at Disney are unionized and some were not happy that Disney gave money to DeSantis' campaign, and people protested, which is their right.

When any company makes any social issue a public display, they are virtue signaling in hopes of gaining sales. "Look at us; we're doing the right thing! Spend your money with us!" Unfortunately, "the right thing" can be easy to misread. There was an incident in the late 19th Century in, I think, St. Louis, where a company did what they thought was a good gesture that would increase sales, Instead, it involved an offensive racial stereotype. The day I came across it, I thought of the WKRP episode involving the turkeys ("As G_d is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly"). It happens all the time.

I'm quite sure that Disney has done what they thought would gain sales. They checked the "right" boxes, said the "right" things. So it's no unusual that what they say and do in the US is different than in China. How it actually works is something quite different.

 

[IceJad]

Yes, we agree. Disney isn’t obviously motivated by anything other than making money off of a global audience, and they are tuning their content according to local predilections. Isn’t it reactionaries on the Right who are convinced Disney has some sort of gay agenda to push?

It doesn't take a business degree major to know companies do things for money. They will (and have and is) do things to the nearest borderline of immoral and illegal if they can earn another penny. Risk vs Reward.

My question isn't specifically targeted at gay agenda nor Disney in particular. It is meant to be more in general. It just so happens this is one of the most recent example that people will have fresh in their memory. Remember the live-action Mulan movie? Disney specifically thanked and credited the Chinese Bureau responsible for oppressing the Uyghurs in Xinjiang. NBA kowtowing to China for a coach standing up for the oppressed where in the US they supported the take a knee?

These things don't escape notice. Therefore the natural labels of inconsistence and hypocritical. I was just hoping that there might be a different perspective besides the obvious "when in Rome" excuse.

 

[gaara4158]

It doesn't take a business degree major to know companies do things for money. They will (and have and is) do things to the nearest borderline of immoral and illegal if they can earn another penny. Risk vs Reward.

My question isn't specifically targeted at gay agenda nor Disney in particular. It is meant to be more in general. It just so happens this is one of the most recent example that people will have fresh in their memory. Remember the live-action Mulan movie? Disney specifically thanked and credited the Chinese Bureau responsible for oppressing the Uyghurs in Xinjiang. NBA kowtowing to China for a coach standing up for the oppressed where in the US they supported the take a knee?

These things don't escape notice. Therefore the natural labels of inconsistence and hypocritical. I was just hoping that there might be a different perspective besides the obvious "when in Rome" excuse.

I don’t think you’re going to find many people eager to stand up for big corporations, but good luck.

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

Why would a mega corporation pander for profit?

Gee. What a mystery.

 

[FireDragon76]

Why would a mega corporation pander for profit?

Gee. What a mystery.

They've researched the numbers and discovered the number of people that get warm fuzzies from their messages are probably their core demographic, and the ones that would be turned off by it, probably wouldn't buy their products anyways. Of course the message is ultimately polarizing and has political implications, but they are in the game to sell things. And if controversy results in sales, all the better.

For instance: the Gillette ads that people were bashing. Women actually spend alot of money on razors now as compared to men men, due to the popularity of beards, electric shavers, and far less frequent shaving in general among men.

 

[Desk trauma]

Disney don't get to play the "we stand for diversity" and "we are only in it for the money" cards whenever they act diametrically opposite in different countries.

Actually they do.

 

[Ana the Ist]

It's just being realistic. There's no contradiction between "standing for diversity" and doing business in China.

Of course there's a contradiction. China is whipping Africans at the job site in Africa right now....China commits genocide against ethnic/religious minorities.

To sit there and say there's no contradiction is silly. They can preach any values they want....but that's all it is....they preach, they don't practice.

The idea of Disney judging anyone on ideological/moral grounds is a joke. You had it correct when you said they may as well make money.....they're a business, that's all they care about. If they have to choose between a very small but diverse audience....or a very large but non-diverse audience....their pretend values evaporate into thin air.

Disney is powerless to change the policies of the PRC, they don't have that kind of leverage even if they wanted to (after all, they couldn't even do anything to stop the governor of Florida, a state in which they have real economic power). So they might as well make money in China for their shareholders.

Exactly....they aren't in the business of practicing values. They're in the making money business.


I pity any who gets moral/ethical/ideological advice from Disney.

 

[Larniavc]

These things don't escape notice. Therefore the natural labels of inconsistence and hypocritical.

It really does just come down to money. The consistency is in making money. Corporations will say and do anything that optimizes profits. Corps are not religious and the only agenda the have is making money.

Most of today's western societies have little issue with homosexuality and that means Disney acts in a way to attract the money from that demographic and allies. In China and other repressive countries not so much: and so Disney acts accordingly. It's not inconsistent because it's not about homosexuality (or any demographic or social issues) it's about money.

 

[Ana the Ist]

It really does just come down to money. The consistency is in making money. Corporations will say and do anything that optimizes profits. Corps are not religious and the only agenda the have is making money.

Most of today's western societies have little issue with homosexuality and that means Disney acts in a way to attract the money from that demographic and allies. In China and other repressive countries not so much: and so Disney acts accordingly. It's not inconsistent because it's not about homosexuality (or any demographic or social issues) it's about money.

Making money is a goal....it's not a moral value. I don't think anyone was judging Disney as "inconsistent" on wanting to make money.


The point was that they don't actually hold any moral values. They just pretend to...for reasons I imagine they're regretting.