This is really simple. Media are now in the service of advertisers. Or more specifically of people who are willing to spend money to target particular people. For example, the NYT targets the wealthy, which is why they frequently have stories about "how much will $900,000 buy in a home"? By targeting the wealthy, the NYT and other media present a view of the world that is very much at odds with the way many if not most Americans experience the world.
There is another set of media that sells access to the "less well off" in America. Here's looking at you fox. It is hard to call them media because what they do is foster outrage and sell that. This audience is targeted by those with political agendas.
Who pays for your media determines how you see the world and what you see of the world. Period.
Not really, it's clear demand for Christian stuff in America is huge. Yet the media avoids this like crazy.
One of the biggest movies of all time is "The passion of the christ" there.Yet most media in America is highly liberal and arguably anti-christian.
It's not about the money clearly, its not about the money.
American Corporations have undergone idealogical capture. There is no other reason Disney risked and lost their self governance by going up against Desantis.
This maybe changing though. My firm is actively beginning to re-evaluate its social activism after 15% layoffs (more layoffs incoming too). The next big phase is regaining our market in the "heartland". I'm in strategic meetings with a lot of executives, that are becoming screaming matches over the direction of the firm.
This isn't a refutation. If the markets for christian stuff and <everything else> are sufficiently disjoint then it can and probably is perfectly rational to choose the bigger <everything else> pie rather than trying to compete for the Christian market. You see "ideological capture," other see the market at work. Somehow I also doubt passing laws in Florida to force Disney to make Mickey Mouse less woke will have the intended effects but it probably feels exciting to you all the same.
To be clear I also think its a bit ridiculous to have Disney operate as a local goverment of a town. But I'd say that if Disney was a feed supply company and not a media/theme park outfit just the same while your (and Ron D's) concern seems to be that "Woke Disney" specifically had that jurisdiction.
It's idealogical capture.
Example: Hallmark doubles down on LGBT content, president splits to create the Great American Channel with pro-christian and anti-lgbt content.
The GAC channel is one of the channels with the fastest increase in subscribers.
This is a case study that several researchers we have are actively investigating as we look to buy ads on that network.
I don't even understand, if the guy was able to leave and create a new channel to serve this audience how is that an example of what you call ideological capture.
An important part of business is targeting your offering to the intended market -- it sounds like the intended market for Hallmark is not the same as the intended market for Great American Channel. If Hallmark content is so objectionable to its viewership that they lose all their viewers to Great American Channel, surely Hallmark will pivot, or go out of business.
Or do you think Ron Desantis has to pass a law forcing Hallmark to make the kind of content which the Great America Channel shows? Is that your solution here, a command economy for basic cable?
Hallmark is a traditionally conservative channel, this is extremely well known to marketing arms of other firms. It's rapid switch to LGBT content was idealogical capture because a large amount of its executives,employees,and target market did not want such things.
Hallmark is a company that was ideologically captured. Imagine a meat company, that forces its president out, to become a vegan company. That meat company underwent idealogical capture, and now works against its original goals that were profitable. Notice how this is different than a pivot, a pivot is executed when the company is not profitable.
The Great America Channel was created and supported by many many ex-hallmark channel employees including executives, actors, finance, and more. It's subscribers increasing every day. Our firm fully expects it to become the new "hallmark" channel within 2 years.
I guess I figured there was some import to the idea of ideological capture. If by that you mean leaders can set direction of their company, some can disagree and leave and found a competitor, and the winner can prevail in the market, then, that’s what I call market capitalism and what you call ideological capture I suppose.
I just don't get it. To me "ideological capture" would imply no alternative in the market, basically there is an inefficiency which is explained and maintained by ideology. And yet, this entire anecdote about the Hallmark channel is about how a guy quit from working there and founded an alternative channel to exploit the inefficiency, and apparently is succeeding!
Disney also employs a lot of LGBTQ employees who were quite understandably really pissed at DeSantis. There's a line to be toed between "public liberal good boy points" for PR and the benefits of self governance, and I think Disney made a decent compromise.
Its certainly an interesting case study (as someone being trained for an executive position), I think about it a lot.
You are really fucked as an Executive here. You're social activists employees will undermine and subvert you. Florida will use State power against you.
Maybe the Federal government might intervene in your space, but they probably won't care.
My conclusion and many executives at my firm is target the social activists for layoffs.
I've combed thru so many social media profiles in preparation for next restructuring/layoffs at my firm.
Just can't risk it in the current economy. The general feeling is the economy is going to get worse before it gets better.
This response makes logical sense, but it deepens my hatred of capitalism. Activists who oppose losing their human rights to a proto-fascist governor are silenced by a company because they're getting in the way of profits, the number one priority for any company or individual. Morally terrible.
I don't think you really hate capitalism. You hate people on the other side of your beliefs.
I think capitalism is whats keeping the tenuous peace right now.
Afterall the market research shows roughly 50% of americans think Desantis is on the right track. If that's the case half the country thinks you are a "fascist" or "villian".
Without capitalism, you'd probably be living in an America that would have been far more to the right.
I consider myself a socialist. I'm not sure what capitalism has to do with keeping the peace though, or what it has to do with DeSantis (who follows early patterns of fascism MUCH more closely)
The point is not the culture wars (see comments below). The point is that having media that is based on targeted advertising causes our society to fracture. QED.
There is another set of media that sells access to the "less well off" in America. Here's looking at you fox. It is hard to call them media because what they do is foster outrage and sell that. This audience is targeted by those with political agendas.
Who pays for your media determines how you see the world and what you see of the world. Period.