Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

[flagged]



If I were Disney, I'd be aiming for a market positioning of, "Netflix, but with content from places like Disney and Marvel and without all of the 2019 political craziness."


Isn't Disney a poster child of political craziness? Copyright laws, workers rights, Walt Disney racism stuff, etc.


You're conflating the company with the product. I'm talking about whether or not politics is manifested in the product.


The same people who are going nuts over the entertainment companies' (including Disney's) abortion stands were also going nuts over Disney's Ellen coming out stand many years ago.


People who want the injection of politics into product generally aren't good customers. In many cases, they don't have that much money to spend, and in other cases, they're too much trouble when less demanding customer's money is just as good.


Disney's stands on gay characters and abortion are considered politics by that group of nuts, is it not? Those stands are manifested in their product, as I just demonstrated. This contradicts your comment in the post I responded to.


Those stands are manifested in their product, as I just demonstrated. This contradicts your comment in the post I responded to.

Not really. Politics manifested as a talk show host, like Ellen Degeneris is fine. People know who Ellen is, and what she thinks. So they can tune in or not, according to their preferences. What I'm referring to is the imposition of politics to customers who don't want it and aren't seeking it out. It's not manifestation of politics, period. Most art has some politics in it. It's a certain disingenuousness and/or high-handedness in doing so.

Thanks for pointing out where I should clarify.


> Politics manifested as a talk show host, like Ellen Degeneris is fine.

Ellen wasn't a talk show host. Ellen was a sitcom character. Thanks for pointing out where you misunderstood. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1997-06-20-mn-5159-s...


Also works for that fictional character, as she's basically Ellen Degeneris anyways.


Nope. Ellen only came out two weeks before her sitcom character came out. The people watching the sitcom would not have known that Ellen was gay when they started watching, and Ellen certainly wasn't outspoken about gay rights at the time.


You're being downvoted but you have a legitimate point. About half the country has problems with abortion. There was absolutely no reason for Netflix, a neutral media company with a customer base encompasing all groups, to publicly take a position that would alienate and create a potential moral crisis for half their subscriber base. It was highly irresponsible and breeched their fiduciary duty to stockholders.


About half the country supports reasonable restrictions. Not the nonsense the southern states are pushing. Big difference.


(And for a cite on that: Only 13% support overturning Roe v. Wade. https://www.npr.org/2019/06/07/730183531/poll-majority-want-...)


Polling on these issues is all over the place, but the number of people who support “overturning roe v wade” is a particularly tricky one to quote considering most people don’t understand constitutional law.

Many of the people in that poll who say they support Roe are also saying they want its ruling to be adjusted - which in practice means overturning Roe and replacing it with new controlling precedent. Arguably, Roe was already overturned once by Planned Parenthood v Casey, which replaced the trimester framework with the undue burden standard and allowed several regulations that had been considered unconstitutional under Roe.


Reva Siegel at Yale Law is good on this topic

RBG I believe supports using the privileges and immunities clause instead


I still don't see why any such company would want to take a political side, no matter which side it takes. How is this any beneficial to its users?


The entertainment companies have already explained why: https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/30/business/disney-bob-iger-abor...

It will be difficult to hire actors to work in these places.


I believe that about as much as I believed the actors who all said they'd go to Canada if Trump were elected. (they are not in Canada now)

Money talks. Most actors are desperate for money.

It's not as if actors constantly get abortions during filming... I hope.

Actors constantly go to on-location filming in places that don't meet Hollywood standards. They go to countries where women are property and there is a death penalty for willingly receptive gay men. If the actors will go to those places, this is just posturing. It'll all be forgotten when there is a paycheck being offered.


> Actors constantly go to on-location filming in places that don't meet Hollywood standards.

There is no stigma with it. Once an uproar has been created as in the Georgia case, it becomes like supporting apartheid South Africa.


Didn't Reed Hastings try to force Peter Thiel off the FB board for supporting Trump?


It does make sense for them to take a stand if they hope to be able to hire local talent in Silicon Valley. A lot of the seemingly political stands these tech companies take lately are done with an eye towards protecting or supporting their employees. In the end an organization is made of people and if all those people support a certain position it will be reflected in how the company behaves. There is no such thing as being truly neutral anyway, something is neutral to something specific but not generally neutral and you can always draw lines for which the same organization is neutral and for which it isn't. It just happens that you drew that line at their stand to abortion rights.




Applications are open for YC Winter 2020

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: