Thursday, October 14, 2021

Are Cultural Boycotts Not Working Anymore?

 


I am Team Depp all the way, baby!  

When this whole controversy between Amber Heard and Johnny Depp broke out a few years ago, the media and basically all of Hollywood came out immediately on Heard's side and tried to slander her ex-husband's name.  Depp lost film role after film role, including controversially being kicked out of the upcoming Fantastic Beasts movie series as the chief villain Grindlewald.  Heard, meanwhile, was free to continue to star in roles, landing a top role in the DCEU as Mera in the Aquaman Movie and the Justice League movie.  Everything seemed set in stone that Depp was a drunken abuser, Heard was an innocent women suffering in an abusive relationship and that Depp needed to go the way of the dodo and realize his career was over.  

And then we got more news.  Johnny Depp showed proof that the shoe was in fact on the other foot.  Heard was the violent abuser and constantly threatened him.  But while Depp has been able to get the Courts back on his side (with a Judge recently throwing out Heard's lawyers attempts to dismiss the case), the media has been strangely silent on this since what should have been Depp's exoneration.  Not only that, but the higher ups at both Disney and Warner Bros. have been very lukewarm to the idea of bringing Depp back or doing the same thing they did to Depp to Heard, who's role in the DCEU is continually at risk of being removed thanks to the massive backlash in favor of Depp.  Warner Bros. seems so confident that Aquaman 2 will be successful that they refuse to answer the fan's demands that Heard be recast with someone less controversial in the role.  

But why has Warner Bros. suddenly found it's spine when it comes to fan backlash?  Why is this the line they choose to draw in the sand?  Why won't these big mega corporations (who are already skirting the anti-trust and anti-monopoly laws very dryly) accept that their fans are considering not watching their films until their demands are met?  What's changed in the last decade to make something that would have been a no brainer (studios refusing both Depp and Heard until the cases were settled) into a chaotic nightmare that skirts the line between fair and utter nonsense?  

It all comes down to what might seem like a controversial claim: We, as in those of us in the US/Canada, aren't their target audiences anymore.  There is a new market for these companies to siphon money off of, to a degree so vast that so long as they score light brownie points with people in their home countries, they can avoid losing just enough money to make profits here.  To the lands of the Far East.  China.  

The Chinese Media Market has exploded in the last decade or so, with somewhat more relaxed laws about what people in the People's Republic of China could see.  Films from the Marvel Cinematic Universe, the new Star Wars Films, the DCEU and all the way down are welcomed into China and produce for these multimedia corporations billions of dollars on their own without factoring in the US/Canadian markets.  And let's be fair, the Depp vs Heard controversy is completely irrelevant to the people of China when put in comparison to us here in the United States.  They don't care about some domestic violence issues, they just want to see Iron Man punch Thanos in the face.  What China fears the most is the West not understanding their culture or taking stances against their government (which former Houston Rockets GM Daryl Morey can attest to).  Ideas that to us in the West would seem more naturalized and understandable are foreign to China, which is why the NBA lost hundreds of millions of dollars after Morey's controversial comments regarding the protests in Hong Kong.  And rather than have the US Government try to open up negotiations with the Chinese, the companies are placating to the Chinese over any and all American support, not caring anymore if the US is buying up their tickets, channel packages or merchandise.  China pays far more because they spend far more per capita.  

Meanwhile, in America, the idea of a boycott, which prior to 2016 would have sounded horrifying to businesses everywhere, are now becoming more and more irrelevant as time passes.  Many Americans felt deeply offended when Colin Kaepernick began kneeling during the National Anthem and began to stop watching football (or some of them say).  The NFL even subtly blacklisted Kaepernick from the league.  But the boycotts produced nothing.  Players kept kneeling.  Teams began to print inclusive labels on their jerseys and helmets and the NFL Flourished.  MLB faced a similar controversy this past spring when the state of Georgia enacted strict voting laws, resulting in the MLB taking the All Star Game away from Atlanta and bringing it to Denver, Colorado.  Many fans were outraged, but the city of Denver flourished.  Fans stopped watching Baseball (or some of them say) and expected Baseball to collapse without their support.  It didn't.  This same thing has happened over and over in sports leagues from Nascar to the Olympics.  So many threaten or even take part in boycotts, only for them to fizzle out after only a few days or even hours.  

It's not just in the sports world.  Companies in the media landscape have been receiving backlash for years now.  These can range from anything, such as having contracts with revealed sex offenders (Harvey Weinstein, Louie CK etc.) to something as simple as Theme Park attractions.  Disney is at the center of this most recent one, as the protests in the US surrounding the death of George Floyd have resulted in the Disney Imagineers announcing that they would be retheming the popular attraction of Splash Mountain at Disneyland and the Magic Kingdom into one themed to The Princess and the Frog, insinuating that the idea was "always" in the works and just happened to be announced during the height of the Floyd protests.  Now, ignoring the fact that The Princess and the Frog would fit into Frontierland in Magic Kingdom as well as Timon and Pumbaa would in Tomorrowland, when one insists that Splash Mountain not be removed or rethemed, they are immediately picked out as being racist or uninformed and are verbally attacked left and right.  Or, in my own case, when I suggest that if Splash Mountain be rethemed due to the racist history of Song of the South that Peter Pan's Flight follow suit due to the film's racist interpretation of Native Americans, they immediately bypass that and insist that Peter Pan is a classic and cannot be changed.  It's kinda ironic, isn't it?  I'll admit, I'm biased towards Splash Mountain as it's my favorite ride in Magic Kingdom and I would never want to see it get the Frozen Ever After treatment and just get stripped apart for something that was made as a cheap cash in.  But I am also in favor of changing the theming of the ride if it offends people, but they must also recognize and respect others who will want other rides changed.  If you're going to stand on that hill and claim that Disney needs to change one thing, while vehemently opposing other changes that will inevitably come.  A company like Disney cannot help itself.  If it fears a backlash from things, it will try to address it in a way that doesn't cost them money or Disney+ subscribers.  

But beyond that, there aren't many major boycotts that are working.  Disney has recently announced plans for a Pay to Play Fastpass system called Genie+ that will allow guests to use the previously free Fastpass system in Walt Disney World for an added fee of $15 per day per person (which for a family of four can lead to an additional $240 dollars for a four day trip) and additional fees for each park's most popular attractions.  Many are outraged by Disney's greediness here, but with the relaxation of pandemic related restrictions, many are just eager to run out and get entertained again, cost be damned.  There's also the controversial decisions regarding Video Gaming, with Game Freak releasing Pokémon Games that not only eliminate a majority of Pokémon available and either places them behind a paywall or doesn't include them at all, or releases cartoonish remakes of games from a decade ago with no real changes aside from being able to play on a TV instead of just on a portable device.  Companies like Square Enix, Nintendo and especially EA have been slammed by fans and customers alike for either not including games on certain systems, having exorbitant price costs for systems or added features or for even charging extra money to play a game it just cost you $60 to buy.  None of these companies have suffered any hits though, chiefly because these companies simply do not care whether or not their customers are happy.  The customers are either too hooked, too lazy or even too uninterested to care, or in the case of those overseas, just bring in too much money to begin with for it to matter substantially.  

Companies are also receiving backlash for the completely absurd amount of streaming services required to watch some shows or events, when back in the day it was only Cable TV with a few added costs if you wanted to watch HBO or Starz.  Now, to watch the whole library of a certain brand of movie, you might need three or four different subscription packages, all of which continue to rise in costs without your consent.  But, considering the gamble they're making that enough people won't end their services because of this and it's paying off for them, they don't care if a few are ticked off.  Companies are entirely fixated on the bottom line.  

Which brings me to the point of this whole article: Do Cultural Boycotts not work anymore?  

Unfortunately, this is becoming an increasingly real and serious issue to deal with.  Companies can have fiercely unamerican policies such as controversial hiring practices, employment proceedings, sexual assault and discrimination issues and even be involved in theft of billions of dollars overseas, and the worst punishment they get is a slap on the wrist.  If someone like Jeff Bezos decides not to pay his taxes, the media applauds him for it.  If some average joe decides not to, they go to prison.  If we boycott Amazon, Walmart or any other company for these sleazy tactics, it doesn't matter because they come back with another hundred or so customers who keep buying stuff from them.  I remember my sister vocally supporting the boycotting of Amazon, only to buy Christmas presents from them last year.  It's just an unavoidable situation we're in at this time.  You can hate Amazon or Walmart or Disney or the NFL for doing what they do, but if they're the only game in town, what other choice do you have?  

Cultural Boycotts have failed on a massive scale for a long time, now.  The NFL is making money hand over fist despite former diehards refusing to watch due to the kneeling during the National Anthem.  Disney can literally parody itself, making billions of dollars while doing so and continue on ignoring their own internal problems or our concerns regarding their practices because they just had a year where 40% of all Box Office Receipts went to them in 2019 (the Top 8 earners of the year all came from the Disney, including The Lion King, Frozen II, Avengers Endgame, The Rise of Skywalker, Aladdin and Toy Story 4).  Amber Heard can keep her role as Mera in Aquaman 2 despite being a literal spousal abusing monster who used the media to smear and ruin her ex-husband.  Warner Bros. can literally pick and choose which casting decisions they make and change, knowing that people will still try to buy their way in to see the next film in a mediocre Cinematic Universe or from the brain child of the Cuckoo for Coco Puffs lady in JK Rowling.  

Speaking of Rowling, she can be an absolute inhuman monster towards transsexuals and the LGBTQ+ community at large, but people still worship her for making the Harry Potter series and thus she will continue to make millions upon millions for every copy of the books or film that is sold, which only increases with the Wizarding World in Universal Studios opening and the advent of the Fantastic Beasts series.  

But there is still hope, and it comes from the people accused themselves.  Depending on the veracity of the crime, the person accused can sometimes not only get their jobs back when the punishment is deemed unfair, but they can also get more jobs on top of that.  Other times, the things said and done can be so beyond salvation that it could utterly devastate your career and legacy around the game.  I'm going to give you two different people to contrast with: James Gunn and Jon Gruden.  You may not know the second if you aren't an NFL Fan, but you soon will.  

Gunn was found to have made some fairly controversial comments back in the day on Twitter that were found to be quite offensive, Disney immediately feared backlash and severed ties to Gunn, removing him from directing the third Guardians of the Galaxy movie.  This proved to be disastrous as several dozen people, including the entire cast of the Guardians series (Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista, Bradley Cooper, Vin Diesel) voiced their strong support for Gunn, claiming that those Tweets were jokes and shouldn't be taken seriously as they did not properly reflect who Gunn was as a man.  Gunn would eventually be brought back on by Disney after further reviews, but the damage was done and some of these relationships could not be rebuilt.  

Gruden is another entity altogether.  Gruden has been an advocate for the NFL going back to the "old school" ways of the 1990s, before analytics and other things became too overpowering.  Ignoring the fact that the primary season Gruden called back to (1998) was a year the Raiders were a mediocre 8-8, Gruden also seemed to want to go back to a time when people couldn't be called out for being less than desirable people.  Only a few days before I thought about making this kind of post, Gruden was revealed to have been involved in email conversations with former Washington Football Team executive Bruce Allen, referring to a Player Representative by the size of his lips, comparing them to Michelin Tires.  Wow...just...wow.  While many assumed Gruden was joking and this would become another Gunn situation, more got revealed.  Like Heard, Gruden just couldn't keep his mouth shut and went on tangents for several years and went into hate-filled spiels about homosexuals and women on top of his racist comments prior to this.  Rather than sit around and wait, Gruden was canned during Monday Night Football.  

So, despite their being little signs that a boycott can work for the long term issues these multinational corporations make through deceiving tactics and misleading stances, there is a sliver of hope to win short term battles.  James Gunn gets to return to making movies.  Johnny Depp gets to take Heard to court for her slander and her abusive ways.  It's just a matter of us as a people needing to unite and keep the fight going no matter who is the one in the limelight.  Do not judge immediately, but don't be surprised if someone you love has a skeleton or two in their closet.  

No comments:

Post a Comment