667
If Meta can do it, you can rule it. (lemmy.ml)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone
50 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 1 year ago (8 children)

At the risk of getting a lot of hate: I feel this is a bit misguided?

"Fiduciary responsibility" is, unfortunately, the law of the land and has been since long before the fascism took root.

The FCC Chairman is capable of doing massive, irreversible damage to a business like Disney/ABC without any means to prevent it (only punish it after the fact, and after a lot of time in court)

As a business, if the management at these companies perceives an undeniable threat to the financial interests of their company, they are literally required by law to mitigate that threat, and they cannot use "violating free speech" as a defense because the 1st amendment only applies to government actions (so they could sue the government for the FCC Chair's interference and still lose in court when their investors file a class action suit for breach of fiduciary responsibility).

This is an impossible situation for these companies and their management.

And yes, the very system itself is to blame here. But I, personally, cannot reasonably expect the leadership of Disney to risk retaliation from the FCC in order to "defend free speech" when doing so can cost them everything, not just professionally, but personally as well. And that's before we even start to discuss the downstream consequences for other people (like all the jobs lost if the FCC goes after Disney/ABC)

So, if you have reason to pirate content independent of this bullshit - which you do, fuck this capitalist shit hole and the companies that profit from and perpetuate it - then go right ahead. I ENCOURAGE it

But we ought to focus our vitriol on the fascists first.

NOTE: I am making a very subtle distinction here... Creating financial consequences for a business such that they are pushed to take action against government overreach is a valid form of resistance! We just need to be clear and honest about what we're doing. I don't hate or begrudge Disney leadership for what they did here. But I will absolutely use the tools at my disposal to resist the fascists, including exploiting the financial interests of corporations to create conflict between the fascists and businesses.

My hope is that the very first thing they did after cancelling Jimmy Kimmel Live! was start working on a first amendment suit against the government. And while we wouldn't know about that (it would be crazy for them to tip their hand early) I would not be at all surprised if that's exactly what is happening behind closed doors right now. I'm very sure that Disney leadership is absolutely bristling at the undue influence being brought to bear on them by the FCC chairman

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    As a business, if the management at these companies perceives an undeniable threat to the financial interests of their company, they are literally required by law to mitigate that threat

    This seems like a good reason not to support them financially if they comply with fascist demands.

    I’m very sure that Disney leadership is absolutely bristling at the undue influence being brought to bear on them by the FCC chairman

    Disney the corporation isn't the people running it because as you've pointed out there are systemic factors forcing their hands. For that reason it doesn't make sense to translate sympathy for what you might imagine they are feeling into sympathy for the company itself. Our relationship as consumers with these companies is inherently adversarial, and there's no need to anthropomorphize them, or take into consideration what would feel "fair" if a company could be thought of as a person, which it shouldn't.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    This seems like a good reason not to support them financially if they comply with fascist demands

    As I said, there are plenty of good reasons not to support these companies financially. I am NOT arguing against withholding your patronage from these service providers. But it has little to do with their willingness to comply with fascist demands and everything to do with creating an environment where the business faces a greater existential threat from losing customers than they do from pushing back against the fascists. It's a subtle but important distinction, IMO.

    Disney the corporation isn't the people running it

    Then the meme should use "that which" instead of "those who". I don't disagree with you but the meme is pretty clearly saying "the people in charge are supporting fascism" rather than "we can force change by hurting the business' bottom line".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    It’s a subtle but important distinction, IMO.

    I'm not clear on what the purpose or justification for it is. To me it sounds like what you're arguing is that these companies are not valid targets for moral condemnation, even if they might be valid targets for a strategic boycott. But why shouldn't they be? Why wouldn't this justify angrily calling for and acting towards their destruction, rather than attempting a strategic negotiation that is not overtly hostile? To me the former has two big advantages:

    1. these companies, as entities if not people, actually merit hostility for what they are doing in this specific instance
    2. coordinating people's actions without a direct emotional reason for action is less effective
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Because it's disingenuous and provides a clear avenue for counter-attack.

    I don't want to get into an argument with everyone over the morality of these companies. That is a far less pressing concern than the fascists on our doorstep. And when your opposition is unscrupulous they will delight in any distraction from their faults.

    I'm essentially performing triage. The infection doesn't matter if the heart has been destroyed. Stop the bleeding first, then handle the infection.

    And if "fascists are wantonly disregarding the first amendment" isn't enough of a direct emotional reason for action then we've already lost 🤷‍♀️

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Honestly the real issue here from my point of view is Nexstar and Sinclair, who have the market and clout to force ABC to comply. But instead of calling for a boycott of the two companies putting on the pressure, everyone is concentrating on the company who's getting pressured and caving. It takes a long time to get a constitutional law case to SCOTUS, which ABC would clearly and easily win, but they would lose a $6.2 Billion dollar merger deal in the mean time. As much as people like to pretend that these companies work for us, they work for the shareholders. And stonks only go up or the CEO and the board have to find new jerbs.

    I'm not defending what they're doing or that they caved at all, just providing an easily downvotable alternate point of view.

    https://www.businessinsider.com/nexstar-deal-fcc-jimmy-kimmel-suspension-2025-9

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •